kicad-developers team mailing list archive

[Wayne Stambaugh <stambaughw@xxxxxxxxx>]

Mattijs

I was not being sarcastic.  Here is what I meant:

For stable version 5, the libraries should be tagged and used for all
stable 5 point releases (5.0.1, 5.0.2, ...).  Most corporate users
prefer consistency over having the latest libraries so installing the
next point release of kicad will not change the libraries.

We can also provide updated library packages periodically for users
(assuming our package devs want to do this) who don't want to use git to
keep up with library changes and don't mind the disruption of having
libraries change during a stable release series.  This would be at the
users discretion.

If this is what you are proposing, then we agree.  If not, then we don't
in which case I need to understand what you are proposing before I can
agree to it.

Cheers,

Wayne

On 1/23/2018 11:16 AM, Matthijs Kooijman wrote:
> Hi Wayne,
> 
>>>> [Proposal to make library upgrades easier]
>>>
>>> As a user, 10000% agree.
>>
>> Me too!  If users want to constantly update their libraries, that's
>> their choice but kicad installers should not be forcing this on users.
>> We should have a fixed set of libraries that are tagged for a release
>> series so users have consistent libraries to work with until the next
>> stable release.  I wouldn't be very happy if my libraries were
>> completely changed when I updated to a new point release of KiCad.
>> Users in corporate environments tend to value stability more than having
>> the latest libraries.
> 
> I'm not sure what you mean here.
>  - Do you actually mean you agree and think something like my proposal
>    should be agreed?
>  - Do you think my proposal includes forcing users to upgrade more
>    often? I am merely proposing to make upgrades easier *when* they
>    happen. How often a user upgrades seems unrelated.
>  - Are you sarcastic and think this is an issue only for users that
>    "constantly update their libraries"?
> 
> I suspect the latter is what you meant, and if so, I tend to disagree,
> since even if such an upgrade happens only rarely (e.g. corresponding
> with a KiCad majore release or Linux distribution upgrade), as a user I
> would still like to see the upgrade happens smoothly, without requiring
> manually rebuilding my entire library table.
> 
> Also, I (and probably others) am actually interested in getting the
> latest library versions, mostly to get new symbols and fixes for
> existing symbols. Of course, backward-incompatible changes are a
> hindrance here, but I think there has already been some talk to limit
> such changes, including library renames, to (for example) major release
> versions. I guess adding new libraries within one major release cycle
> would be non-disruptive, though, so that would still benefit from my
> proposal.
> 
> Gr.
> 
> Matthijs
>