kicad-developers team mailing list archive

[Maciej Sumiński <maciej.suminski@xxxxxxx>]

On 06/10/2014 06:02 PM, Dick Hollenbeck wrote:
> > > The attached patch will give you an idea of proposed changes.
> > >
> > > Regards,
> > > Orson
> >
> > We can kill two birds with one stone here.
> >
> > I like your changes, but they are insufficient to preserve the current behaviour.  With a
> > little bit of work we can accomplish a couple of useful things.
> >
> > I think we need to save that footprint in the PROJECT.  Maybe put it there upon wxFrame
> > destruction, and go get it upon wxFrame creation.  That makes it project specific.
> >
> > I plan on renaming the PROJECT::RPath() infrastructure to RString().  That is it will hold
> > wxStrings instead of the goofy RETAINED_PATH.  What is now RETAINED_PATH can also go into
> > the RString() holder.  enum RETPATH_T becomes RETSTRING_T.
>
> :
>
> > I can do the RString() change in the next half day, and it's something I intended to do
> > anyways.
> >
> > Orson, this set of changes had to happen anyways as we moved to multiple open projects, so
> > I  welcome your help and cooperation.
>
> I committed class PROJECT::GetRString() and SetRString() in rev. 4934, paving the way for
> saving the MODULE in a session and project specific location and retaining the current UI
> behaviour, while clearing some of the clutter in the path of multiple open projects.

Hi Dick,

I agree with Lorenzo and Tom - I prefer the module editor to start 
either empty or with a footprint loaded from library or board, without 
storing anything inside. How often does it happen to you to make use of 
the feature? I guess the module editor is primarily invoked to either 
modify a specific footprint from a board/library or to create a new one.
However, I strongly believe we need to cooperate. Sometimes it leads to 
a compromise, but the final decision is particularly crucial if other 
main developers agree on the subject. Wayne, Jean-Pierre - I am willing 
to hear your opinion on the topic.
Given everyone shares the view, then having a choice between adding more 
static fields to the module editor or the above solution, I pick your 
proposal. Thank you for the advices and the groundwork that will 
definitely ease the task.

Regards,
Orson