kicad-developers team mailing list archive

[Dick Hollenbeck <dick@xxxxxxxxxxx>]

On May 8, 2013 7:24 AM, "Simon Huwyler" <simon.huwyler@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>
>> Kicad  evolves based on individual need.  Try and stay close to your
>> individual use cases, else you may end up creating something few will
use.
>> Einstein: as simple as possible, but not simpler.
>
>
> So, if I get you right, the whole KiCad repository is merely a huge
collection of branches each one created for personal needs (as in my case
the very special need to deal with _fabrication_ layer constraints), and
only time will show what turns out to be a feature that should be taken
into the main branch?
>
> So, my approch was not that bad, indeed! :-) Therefore, I should upload
this branch, even knowing that it is useful for _me_ and probably no one
else?
> Sorry for these newbie-ish questions. But this is really a whole new
world for me. :-) I was quite reluctant doing so, because I thought I
should only "contribute" things that are really useful to others and have a
chance to eventually make it to the main branch.

This approach is now common in launchpad hosted projects and at github.

Your blueprint idea is worth a try.  I don't know how good its UI is.  But
often great ideas are lost in the  stream of the mailing list.

>
>
>
> -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht----- From: Lorenzo Marcantonio
> Sent: Wednesday, May 08, 2013 2:12 PM
>
> To: Kicad Developers
> Subject: Re: [Kicad-developers] layer based constraints
>
> On Wed, May 08, 2013 at 07:03:48AM -0500, Dick Hollenbeck wrote:
>>
>> Alfons, in munich, worked for zucken (spelling), an eda company, for 15
>> years, well bfore writing freerouter.  His UI includes netclass features.
>> It is not obvious that they merely mimic the specctra spec.  If not, is
>> this his experience being injected to trump something he thought was
>> imperfect?
>
>
> I can't say... SPECCTRA was a pre-existing product, and simply became the
> defacto interface. Maybe it's simply well engineered for the things it
> needs to do, but then every company will 'personalize' it depending on
> the requirements (so they can say "our specctra is better than yours!").
> The same freerouter AFAIK don't implement it in full (no arcs, for
> example, seeing the kicad code).
>
> Or maybe the author of freerouter simply added the extra features
> because they were convenient (and to hell with the specctra standard).
>
>> Kicad  evolves based on individual need.  Try and stay close to your
>> individual use cases, else you may end up creating something few will
use.
>> Einstein: as simple as possible, but not simpler.
>
>
> That's why we are discussing if/how enhanced rules can be applied.
>
> --
> Lorenzo Marcantonio
> Logos Srl
>
> _______________________________________________
> Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers
> Post to     : kicad-developers@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers
> More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
>
> _______________________________________________
> Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers
> Post to     : kicad-developers@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers
> More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp