It's not a blocker as they can still be merged even if the checker
script reports violations. Any contribution gets checked by a
librarian anyway.
Please remember that even some of the stricter KLC rules may be
ignored under certain exceptions. Don't take the automatic scripts as
a rejection of your contribution :)
On 25 Feb 2017 8:50 PM, "Miron Iancu" <miancu@xxxxxxxx
<mailto:miancu@xxxxxxxx>> wrote:
Thank you, Oliver. Enjoy. :)
Meanwhile, the script keeps rejecting any pushes although the
rejection criteria is clearly not included in the documented KLC.
I haven't found any documented recommendations regarding positions
and alignment:
Violating EC03 - Extra Checking
Check part reference, name and footprint position and alignment
field: reference, posx 400, posy 600, recommended posx -700, posy 525
field: reference, justification L, recommended R
field: name, posx 400, posy 500, recommended posx -700, posy 450
field: name, justification L, recommended R
field: footprint, posx -800, posy -600, recommended posx 650, posy
-450
This is a blocker for any library contribution. Can anyone,
PLEASE, solve this ?
Regards,
Miron
On 25.02.2017 11:36, Oliver Walters wrote:
Not yet, sorry. Currently away for a couple of days. Will get to
it when I can :)
On 25 Feb 2017 8:35 PM, "Miron Iancu" <miancu@xxxxxxxx
<mailto:miancu@xxxxxxxx>> wrote:
Mornin' Oliver.
Any updates about the same ?
BR
Miron
On 24.02.2017 23:28, Oliver Walters wrote:
Thanks miron, I'll look into this
On 25 Feb 2017 06:34, "Miron Iancu" <miancu@xxxxxxxx
<mailto:miancu@xxxxxxxx>> wrote:
One more example - this script is flawed:
Violating EC01 - Extra Checking
Check pins names against pin types.
pin VOUT (12): O (OUTPUT), expected: w (POWER OUTPUT)
pin VREF (15): I (INPUT), expected: W (POWER INPUT)
The component is AD8362ARU and I assume the script tries
to do some ERC for the electrical type of the pins.
On AD8362xx (and many others) the so called VOUT pin is
NOT power output, it is purely logarithmic output so the
type is correctly set as "O" and SHOULD NOT be "w".
If you base the accept/ rejection of a pull request on
these semantic rules, not only the checks will always
fail but the ERC will definetely not be consistent with
the reality.
Please modify the script. It simply does not deliver.
BR
Miron
Pe 24 feb. 2017, la 21:26, Miron Iancu <miancu@xxxxxxxx
<mailto:miancu@xxxxxxxx>> a scris:
Hello everybody,
While creating a pull request for some components, the
check script (Travis) provides such "recommendations"
Violating EC03 - Extra Checking
Check part reference, name and footprint position and
alignment
field: reference, posx 400, posy 600, recommended posx
-700, posy 525
field: reference, justification L, recommended R
field: name, posx 400, posy 500, recommended posx -700,
posy 450
field: name, justification L, recommended R
field: footprint, posx -800, posy -600, recommended
posx 650, posy -450
These are not part of the KLC AFAIK and the script
exits with error.
We should strictly stick to the rules not recommendations.
It is quite frustrating, I tried four times to get same
errors.
You either remove these from the script, or update the KLC
regards,
M
--
Mailing list:
https://launchpad.net/~kicad-lib-committers
<https://launchpad.net/%7Ekicad-lib-committers>
Post to : kicad-lib-committers@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
<mailto:kicad-lib-committers@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Unsubscribe :
https://launchpad.net/~kicad-lib-committers
<https://launchpad.net/%7Ekicad-lib-committers>
More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
<https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp>
--
Mailing list:
https://launchpad.net/~kicad-lib-committers
<https://launchpad.net/%7Ekicad-lib-committers>
Post to : kicad-lib-committers@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
<mailto:kicad-lib-committers@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Unsubscribe :
https://launchpad.net/~kicad-lib-committers
<https://launchpad.net/%7Ekicad-lib-committers>
More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
<https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp>
