kicad-developers team mailing list archive

[Jon Evans <jon@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Is there any good reason to allow "deleting" layers that are part of
footprints?
I could see deleting routing layers (inner copper, etc) but I think we
should just get rid of the idea that you can "delete" the silkscreen etc.,
just make it "disable" so that it can be re-enabled without any fuss.

On Thu, Mar 22, 2018 at 1:48 PM, Andrey Kuznetsov <kandrey89@xxxxxxxxx>
wrote:

> I thought we were talking about deleting layers, not disabling them?
>
> I agree with Wayne, a footprint is a whole item, deleting part of it means
> it is no longer valid, and thus must be removed.
>
> What if someone wants to remove the silkscreen layer because they don't
> want it for production? I guess they can just delete the silk gerber before
> sending it in. I can't think of a reason someone would want to delete a
> layer on a final product, without being able to do it through gerber files.
> Otherwise deleting layers would be done during initial design stage where
> someone is trying to figure out how many layers to have, but if they delete
> a top layer with all the SMDs on it, then well, they should be warned about
> it, and if they choose to delete it, it's their fault and they will have to
> undo or reimport all the items again.
>
> Disabling a layer should never delete existing objects.
>
> On Thu, Mar 22, 2018 at 10:15 AM, jp charras <jp.charras@xxxxxxxxxx>
> wrote:
>
>> Le 21/03/2018 à 17:46, Wayne Stambaugh a écrit :
>> > 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
>> >
>>
>> I had a look at this patch.
>>
>> I do not think removing something to footprints already on board is a
>> good idea.
>>
>> I understand other board items can or must be removed when disabling a
>> layer, but removing something
>> to a footprint is breaking this footprint, that become no more reliable.
>>
>> What happens if later, a disabled layer like a silkscreen is re-enabled
>> for some reason?
>> Footprints carefully designed are now broken.
>>
>> Like Seth, I am thinking disabling a layer (disabling is not deleting)
>> should not modify footprints.
>>
>> Currently, the Layer Setup dialog can create issues because it allows
>> disabling layers that are now
>> used in DRC (edge cuts, courtyard, and margin that should be used in V6
>> to create obstacles).
>> Some other layers are mandatory to make a board: solder mask, solder
>> paste.
>> These layers should be *always* enabled.
>>
>> So a better fix is certainly not to delete something in footprints, but
>> do not allow disabling these
>> mandatory layers, and for others layers, display a warning if a disabled
>> layer is in use in a footprint.
>>
>> For me, the major bug is in the Layer Setup dialog that allows disabling
>> any layer.
>>
>>
>> > 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.
>>
>> --
>> Jean-Pierre CHARRAS
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> 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
>>
>
>
>
> --
> Remember The Past, Live The Present, Change The Future
> Those who look only to the past or the present are certain to miss the
> future [JFK]
>
> kandrey89@xxxxxxxxx
> Live Long and Prosper,
> Andrey
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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
>
>