kicad-developers team mailing list archive

[Wayne Stambaugh <stambaughw@xxxxxxxxx>]

On 07/14/2018 10:55 AM, Ouabache Designworks wrote:
> 
> 
> On Fri, Jul 13, 2018 at 7:49 PM, Mark Roszko <mark.roszko@xxxxxxxxx
> <mailto:mark.roszko@xxxxxxxxx>> wrote:
> 
>     Wayne,
> 
>     Guess going to suggest it should be a priority to version the config
>     into folders.
> 
>     This is a user made chart on how to install kicad 5 which honestly is
>     silly it has to even exist lol
>     https://kicad-info.s3-us-west-2.amazonaws.com/original/2X/d/d6143659e9237fc358588bed761ef3e557454cde.png
>     <https://kicad-info.s3-us-west-2.amazonaws.com/original/2X/d/d6143659e9237fc358588bed761ef3e557454cde.png>
> 
> 
> 
> Now imagine that you are working on three or four different projects at
> the same time and they each used a different version
> of Kicad. That is what IC designers have to deal with. Chips take
> several years to complete and the tools rev all the time.
> You start a new chip six months into your last design and it may use
> different revs of tools.
> 
> That is why IC designers use environment managers. All the revs are
> installed in parallel and each project can pick the one that
> it wants.
> 
> John Eaton
> 

Pragmatic use of our limited developer resources is not silly.  It's
just the reality of the project.  Would I like for KiCad to be able to
provide support for this?  Of course I would.  I am fairly certain that
if I polled KiCad users if they would rather have all of the features
listed in v6 roadmap or be able to install multiple versions of KiCad
with only a few of those features that they would choose all of the
features.  Even if we implemented the proposed changes for v5, who is
going to backport it v4?  Given the divergence between the code bases,
good luck with that.  We are already 6 months behind when I would have
liked to get v5 out the door so delaying v5 another couple of months is
really not a good option.  I'm fine with implementing this for 5.1 if
someone is interested in coding it but that still doesn't solve the v4
issue which I'm guessing user's want to keep installed along side v5.