On May 8, 2013 7:24 AM, "Simon Huwyler" <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> Kicad evolves based on individual need. Try and stay close to your >> individual use cases, else you may end up creating something few will use. >> Einstein: as simple as possible, but not simpler. > > > So, if I get you right, the whole KiCad repository is merely a huge collection of branches each one created for personal needs (as in my case the very special need to deal with _fabrication_ layer constraints), and only time will show what turns out to be a feature that should be taken into the main branch? > > So, my approch was not that bad, indeed! :-) Therefore, I should upload this branch, even knowing that it is useful for _me_ and probably no one else? > Sorry for these newbie-ish questions. But this is really a whole new world for me. :-) I was quite reluctant doing so, because I thought I should only "contribute" things that are really useful to others and have a chance to eventually make it to the main branch.
This approach is now common in launchpad hosted projects and at github. Your blueprint idea is worth a try. I don't know how good its UI is. But often great ideas are lost in the stream of the mailing list. > > > > -----Ursprüngliche Nachricht----- From: Lorenzo Marcantonio > Sent: Wednesday, May 08, 2013 2:12 PM > > To: Kicad Developers > Subject: Re: [Kicad-developers] layer based constraints > > On Wed, May 08, 2013 at 07:03:48AM -0500, Dick Hollenbeck wrote: >> >> Alfons, in munich, worked for zucken (spelling), an eda company, for 15 >> years, well bfore writing freerouter. His UI includes netclass features. >> It is not obvious that they merely mimic the specctra spec. If not, is >> this his experience being injected to trump something he thought was >> imperfect? > > > I can't say... SPECCTRA was a pre-existing product, and simply became the > defacto interface. Maybe it's simply well engineered for the things it > needs to do, but then every company will 'personalize' it depending on > the requirements (so they can say "our specctra is better than yours!"). > The same freerouter AFAIK don't implement it in full (no arcs, for > example, seeing the kicad code). > > Or maybe the author of freerouter simply added the extra features > because they were convenient (and to hell with the specctra standard). > >> Kicad evolves based on individual need. Try and stay close to your >> individual use cases, else you may end up creating something few will use. >> Einstein: as simple as possible, but not simpler. > > > That's why we are discussing if/how enhanced rules can be applied. > > -- > Lorenzo Marcantonio > Logos Srl > > _______________________________________________ > Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers > Post to : [email protected] > Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers > More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp > > _______________________________________________ > Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers > Post to : [email protected] > Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers > More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
_______________________________________________ Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers Post to : [email protected] Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
