kicad-developers team mailing list archive

[Wayne Stambaugh <stambaughw@xxxxxxxxxxx>]

On 6/10/2014 12:41 PM, Maciej Sumiński wrote:
> 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
> 

The current behavior is fine in the context of being launched from
Pcbnew when editing a board and/or project libraries.  That being said,
there are times when it would be useful to be able to edit footprint
libraries outside the the context of a project.  In other words, have
the option to use the footprint editor as a stand alone application.  I
don't know if that is possible given the current design or not.  I have
not had time to look at the Kiway changes in any detail.

Wayne