kicad-developers team mailing list archive

[Thomas Langås <thomas.langaas@xxxxxxxxx>]

On Tue, Aug 22, 2017 at 9:36 PM, Wayne Stambaugh <stambaughw@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> I'm not opposed to this change.  However, there are two schools of
> thought when it comes to board layout: strict layout constraints and no
> layout constraints.  I tend to lean towards the latter but I've been
> doing this for 30 years so I am painfully aware of the pitfalls of no
> layout constraints and have a pretty good idea of what not to do.
> Should we choose to loosen the layout constraints for blind/buried vias,
> then we should be prepared for a serious tongue lashing the first time
> someone violates their board vendor's manufacturing limitations and ends
> up with a bunch of useless and likely expensive boards.  Maybe at some
> point in the future we will have a complete constraint system that can
> cover all possibilities but until then we have to walk that fine line
> between power users and beginners.


Is there a good reason why not to build this by rulesets, and allow
people to define
their own rulesets within KiCAD.  You can have a sensible default rule
that covers
the 80-90%, and allow the people who know more about this and what they need
just remove the default rule and add their own advanced rules?

Of course, this would imply that without any rules at all, it's just
willy nilly and
everything allowed.  But isn't that the way design rules should be?  If you want
to try ice skating down a mountain, it might not be smart, but it's your own
choice  ;-)


-- 
Thomas