kicad-developers team mailing list archive

[Chris Pavlina <pavlina.chris@xxxxxxxxx>]

Wayne,

The patch includes a minor refactoring of a function that ended up not being
necessary in the end - originally my code made changes to it that were hard
without refactoring, but I ended up reworking my code and didn't need that
function anymore. I didn't revert the refactoring, as it worked well and was
cleaner. However, if you notice any issues with FOOTPRINT_EDIT_FRAME::Import_Module(),
let me know, I will revert the changes and send you an updated patch.

On Mon, May 02, 2016 at 11:46:34AM -0400, Wayne Stambaugh wrote:
> Chris,
> 
> Give me some time to test your patch.  I will apply it to all of my
> systems and test it to make sure it doesn't break anything.
> 
> Thanks,
> 
> Wayne
> 
> On 5/1/2016 6:59 PM, Chris Pavlina wrote:
> > Followed up on this question in a separate mail.
> > 
> > Patch is attached. Please have a good look over it, if it's going to stable I
> > don't want to be the only one who's had a look :)
> > 
> > On Sat, Apr 30, 2016 at 07:57:36PM -0400, Chris Pavlina wrote:
> >> I'm very close to finished - I'll take some time to fully test and review the
> >> patch to ensure it's ready for a commit to stable, though - will submit
> >> tomorrow.
> >>
> >> I have a question. Currently, when loading a full library as opposed to a
> >> single footprint, we silently ignore errors and just do not load footprints
> >> that have syntax issues. This of course means that format versioning won't
> >> really work for these. The user will never see the hint about their version
> >> being old.
> >>
> >> Should I:
> >> 1) Leave it as is. (please say no please say no please say no)
> >> 2) Make an exception for the version-too-new case.
> >> 3) Change this and *do* display these errors, in all cases.
> >>
> >> On Fri, Apr 29, 2016 at 09:24:19AM -0400, Wayne Stambaugh wrote:
> >>> Thanks for the update.  I've been holding off on releasing 4.0.3 for
> >>> this.  I apologize for my absence over the last week or so.  I've been
> >>> really busy at work and got sick on top of that so my motivation to
> >>> spend what little free time I had working on KiCad was low.
> >>>
> >>> Cheers,
> >>>
> >>> Wayne
> >>>
> >>> On 4/28/2016 2:38 PM, Chris Pavlina wrote:
> >>>> Just a quick ping to reassure y'all I'm still working on this - been caught
> >>>> up in other things a bit the last couple weeks. I've got a nearly working
> >>>> implementation here.
> >>>>
> >>>> On Tue, Apr 12, 2016 at 12:22:48PM -0400, Wayne Stambaugh wrote:
> >>>>> I doubt this going to be a big issue.  Since the new board file format
> >>>>> was implemented over fours years ago there have been a handful of
> >>>>> changes.  I think we're going to be OK with just the date code.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> On 4/12/2016 12:06 PM, Chris Pavlina wrote:
> >>>>>> Let's just not do more than one format change in a single day... I think that
> >>>>>> would be a beneficial decision for project stability as well...
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> On Tue, Apr 12, 2016 at 05:26:27PM +0200, Timofonic wrote:
> >>>>>>> Despite my very limited knowledge, I like the simple approach. 
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> What about using letters if more than one format change is done? 
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> 20160412A, 20160412B, 20160412C...
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> On April 12, 2016 2:30:23 PM CEST, Chris Pavlina <pavlina.chris@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >>>>>>>> Honestly I don't see the advantage to using Semantic Versioning for an
> >>>>>>>> internal file format version... and using 2016.04.12 instead of
> >>>>>>>> 20160412
> >>>>>>>> just seems like an exercise in making the parser more complicated.
> >>>>>>>> Could
> >>>>>>>> you explain *why* this would be a good thing?
> >>>>>>>> On Apr 12, 2016 1:51 AM, "David Cary" <d.cary+2012@xxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> Please at least consider Semantic Versioning ( http://semver.org/ ).
> >>>>>>>>> And I recommend that if you figure out any way to improve on SemVer,
> >>>>>>>>> please speak up so maybe the next version of SemVer can incorporate
> >>>>>>>>> those improvements.
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> I have enjoyed the discussion of new features and various ideas for
> >>>>>>>>> versioning, and I encourage you to discuss them further.
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> I am happy that the native KiCad file formats already avoid many
> >>>>>>>>> problems mentioned in
> >>>>>>>>> "Designing File Formats" http://www.fadden.com/tech/file-formats.html
> >>>>>>>>> .
> >>>>>>>>> Are there any remaining recommendations in that essay that maybe we
> >>>>>>>>> should include in future versions of KiCad file formats?
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> If hypothetically we did use Semantic Versioning,
> >>>>>>>>> would it be better to do (a) or (b)?:
> >>>>>>>>> (a) have a single KiCad version number that KiCad writes into every
> >>>>>>>>> new file it creates, or
> >>>>>>>>> (b) have a separate and independent version number for each part of
> >>>>>>>>> KiCad -- the Eeschema version number written into new schematic
> >>>>>>>> files,
> >>>>>>>>> a separate Pcbnew version number written into new footprint and PCB
> >>>>>>>>> layout files, etc.
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> (How many independent version numbers could option (b) require?)
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> On Thu, Apr 7, 2016 at 1:04 PM, Chris Pavlina
> >>>>>>>> <pavlina.chris@xxxxxxxxx>
> >>>>>>>>> wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>> What about using the date the change was made as a "version
> >>>>>>>> number"? Can
> >>>>>>>>>> integerize it like 20160407 for example. This allows easy
> >>>>>>>>> cross-referencing of
> >>>>>>>>>> a format version with the revision that it was made in, and is
> >>>>>>>>> guaranteed to
> >>>>>>>>>> increase monotonically if you use a YMD format :)
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> I agree with Wayne that it's more meaningful than most version
> >>>>>>>> strings.
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> My understanding is that "integerized date" without punctuation is
> >>>>>>>>> more commonly known as the "ISO 8601 date basic format".
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> Recently I've been putting a date like that on the silkscreen of my
> >>>>>>>>> PCBs. (I use the "ISO 8601 date extended format" like 2016-04-07, the
> >>>>>>>>> format produced by the KiCad "%D" format symbol).
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> Is it possible to combine that with Semantic versioning, getting
> >>>>>>>>> something like 2016.04.07 ?
> >>>>>>>>> (This assumes we won't make a breaking change in the file format more
> >>>>>>>>> than once a year -- optimistic? :-)
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> --
> >>>>>>>>> David Cary
> >>>>>>>>> +1(918)813-2279
> >>>>>>>>> http://OpenCircuits.com/
> >>>>>>>>> http://david.carybros.com/
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
> >>>>>>>> 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
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> -- 
> >>>>>>> Enviado desde mi dispositivo Android con K-9 Mail. Por favor disculpa mi brevedad.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> _______________________________________________
> >>>>>> 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
> >>>