kicad-developers team mailing list archive

[Wayne Stambaugh <stambaughw@xxxxxxxxx>]

JP,

Did you take a look at this patch?  I know we have talked about this in
the past and that the fix would not be easy.  Until we can define and
implement a complete solution, this could be a short term fix.  When you
get a chance, please take a look at it an comment on it.

hauptmech,

I'm not sure about the idea of breaking a footprint (module) into layer
by layer pieces to match the removed layers.  Footprints are typically
thought of as atomic objects.  I wonder if it wouldn't be more prudent
to remove the footprint if any of it's layers are removed from the layer
list and warn the user that removing said layer(s) would result in
footprints being removed.

Thanks,

Wayne

On 3/20/2018 4:19 AM, Eeli Kaikkonen wrote:
> 2018-03-20 0:19 GMT+02:00 Seth Hillbrand <seth.hillbrand@xxxxxxxxx
> <mailto:seth.hillbrand@xxxxxxxxx>>:
> 
> 
>     As it is, the patch resolves an issue and creates another.
> 
> 
> Actually Seth is wrong here. It doesn't create another problem. Namely,
> as the code without the patch works now, it leaves the board uneditable
> anyways, and without a warning. Just test with a footprint which has
> nothing but ref and value and one paste-only pad. It doesn't matter
> whether the pad is left there or removed after the layer is deleted. The
> footprint can't be selected or edited.
> 
> I would still go with this patch, just add a sentence to the warning if
> pads are deleted. "Additionally this may lead to footprints which cannot
> be edited or deleted" or something like that.
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> 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
>