On Sep 24, 2010, at 7:25 AM, Lorenzo Marcantonio wrote: > On Thu, 23 Sep 2010, Dick Hollenbeck wrote: > >> Inheritance. hmmm. Why not just *copy* symbol by symbol and make each >> copied symbol into a part-specific component in a new project specific >> library. > > I agree. More simple to use and less complex to implement, can't be > a bad thing :D > >> But we are moving in the right direction by really thinking about what >> we do. The heavy library is a wish, I don't think anybody will ever be >> able to keep up with the new stuff hitting the market. It is way too > > It simply can't exist, not even the big vendor can do this (well, maybe > a vendor which lives selling libraries). And anyway (excluding stuff > with more than 80 pins) you draw a part in 15 minutes when you need it. > > Given the 'thinking time' I need to properly use some component, drawing > the symbol is a small period of time (exercise: design a power supply > and tell me what % of the time you lost drawing the switcher IC:D) > > For footprints (packages) that's another thing, but, excluding some > exotic component (like DirectFETs and PowerSOs) these are JEDECed anyway > and can be dynamically generated. > >> A simpler set of ambitions/goals is to simply get the parts correct that >> you intend to use on a specific board. And I even struggle with that. > > I'm curious, why are you struggling? > >> Is there any value in having a project specific library that is more >> tightly bound to the project? Or is a personal library good enough? I > > For me no... When I need a component that's not already in a library > I simply draw it and put in the right system library. So in the next > board I can use it: I never encountered a component *only* for a board, > and since my assembly facility have to stock it for production it's > better to reuse it for the next projects too, if possible. >
I would be very happy with an export function, doing: Export all used components into a project library. This way I can send the schematics on to the next person and (s)he can adjust where needed, without having to look for some components/footprint differences. Of course, its export, so the component would still live in the system library to be re-used. >> actually think it might be worth discussing putting a project specific >> library *within* the project, say for example within the schematic. >> This fully embraces the use case behavior. It also centralizes the >> place where you might fill in the things needed to make a good BOM. >> Each unique part is in there, and then each unique part can be >> instantiated from there into the schematic and it's reference designator >> changed, nothing more. > > Technically there would be no need for 'libraries' since anyway they're > searched in order. You could just build a big database with *all* the > stuff inside (and a good search facility): that's what orcad's CIM does > IIRC. Libraries are for browsing, not searching IMHO. /Martijn _______________________________________________ Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers Post to : [email protected] Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
