kicad-developers team mailing list archive

[jp charras <jp.charras@xxxxxxxxxx>]

Le 10/08/2016 à 16:36, Wayne Stambaugh a écrit :
> On 8/6/2016 11:03 AM, Thomas Pointhuber wrote:
>> Hy,
>>
>> as Library maintainer I got some insights about the various file formats and as well their current
>> limits. Inspired by the current eeschema file format rework I would propose some changes for the
>> footprint files as well.
>>
>>
>> Adding features which are planned for eeschema (or already implemented):
>>
>>  * bezier function
> 
> Could be done.  We have had file and object support for them in Eeschema
> since I've been with the project (10yrs) but we still do not have anyway
> to edit them in either the schematic or symbol editors yet.  That should
> tell you something about any implementation time even if I add support
> for them in the file format.
> 
>>  * properties
> 
> We already support them.  Once again no editing support.
> 
>>  * datasheet urls
> 
> This would be done using a field just like in Eeschema.
> 
>>
>>
>> Other ideas:
>>
>>  * adding something like a group attribute or allow folders inside *.pretty folders.
> 
> I don't think there is anything preventing you from adding sub-folders
> inside folders.  You will just have to adjust your fp-lib-table
> accordingly.  I'm not thrilled with the idea of automatically parsing
> subfolders in the pcb footprint library plugin.  The current parser only
> looks for .kicad_mod files in the current folder and will ignore subfolders.

I am not sure it works for libs on Github.

> 
>>
>>    Currently our *.pretty folders are getting bigger and bigger and adding an additional level
>>    in the tree selector would likely improve UX. (For example we have now a *.pretty folder
>>    with >500 footprints of a single manufacturer)
> 
> I would break these into subfolders.  It seems to me that this is more
> of a library management issue than a file format issue.
> 
>>
>>  * From what I learned, *.pretty folders are currently specified to only contain *.kicad_mod files.
>>    From a logical view (As well as for maintainability and consistency) we should add the 3d files
>>    into those directories as well.
> 
> I don't think this is a good idea because you would have same 3D model
> in multiple footprint libraries which would make model maintenance a
> nightmare.  Once again, there is nothing from preventing you for doing
> this now.  AFAIK you can put your 3D models anywhere.  All you have to
> do is make sure your 3D model path is correct.  Once again, I see this
> is library management issue.

These files are usually very large.
They could also create download time issues for *.pretty libs on Github.

> 
>>
>>  * there are cases where footprints need cuttings inside the pcb, which are not round or oval.
>>    It's possible to use Edge.Cuts inside the footprint (with external editing) which works, but
>>    it would be a good idea to specify this case. (Which would also allow us to display those
>>    footprints correctly inside the 3d viewer)
> 
> This is also one of those things that is already supported in the file
> format but there is no support for in the board or footprint library
> editors.
> 
>>
>>
>> Regards,
>>
>> Thomas Pointhuber

Please, don't see *.pretty folders as usual folders, but as libraries.
This is not exactly the same.

-- 
Jean-Pierre CHARRAS