You are always going to run into such problems if you switch from one system to another, as you will always have to take into account any "special" devices / mods that you have made.
Yes the modules are imbedded in the .brd files, you can think of them as non-copper tracks, but otherwise they can be treated in the same manner as any track by the system. Have you spotted the projectname.cache file that eeschema creates? that is a cache of all the lib parts that a project uses. So you can make use of that if you are swapping between systems. So between the board file and the cache file you have all the necessary libs and mods to recreate the project. Andy On Wed, 12 Aug 2009 15:58:17 +0000 (GMT) abhijit biswas <[email protected]> wrote: > What you are saying is a good idea, which means I should make my own library > in a proper hierarchy. It good but there is a little problem If am am trying > to open my schematic in any other system where my personal libraries are not > available the schematic will not come correctly on the screen. But in case > of *.brd files are coming correctly in any system in spite of not having my > personal library there. I think the brd files are keeping the footprints > embedded in it. Even I can save the new footprint in the new machine to its > standard library. > > I think EEschema should have such option. At least the component used in a > schematic should be viewable in any system irrespective of the component > available on that systems library. This will help to recover a component from > schematic if it is lost. > > > > > --- On Tue, 11/8/09, Andy Eskelson <[email protected]> wrote: > > From: Andy Eskelson <[email protected]> > Subject: Re: [kicad-users] Kicad library collection; global online database; > filtered by supervisor > To: [email protected] > Date: Tuesday, 11 August, 2009, 10:50 PM > > > > > > > > > > > > > You should always save YOUR libs and modules to your own > private library. > > That's basic file safety. > > > > Next problem is that different people will have different ideas as to > > what any particular device should look like. A simple example from the > > list from the past few days is the symbols for a resistor or elect. cap. > > Some people expect a zig-zag for the R while others expect the oblong > > box. For the cap one standard is with a curved neg. electrode and the > > other for a solid oblong. > > > > OK in these cases adding both is not that much of a problem, but > > multiply this by the 1000's of different devices and such like and > > things get rather more complex. > > > > I do agree that uploading a device as a submission to the main libs is a > > good idea, but I don't think that it will solve the issue you are making > > which is keeping the hierarchy intact. Especially as there could be > > multiple versions of a device. > > > > I think what is needed is a somewhat better method of managing the libs > > and modules. One way would be to have a different type of lib or mod that > > indicates a user generated part, one that would not get overwritten by > > upgrades. However as the lib files can contain several different > > types of device this is not an easy way to do things. > > Perhaps an easier method would be to have a duplicate set of libs > > designated as user controlled, where you can drop your own designs into. > > when you select a standard lib the system automatically includes the > > devices from the user lib of the same name as well. > > > > Over time as user submitted parts are included into the standard libs > > users could edit their designs and libs as needed. > > > > I do think that a bit more work on how the libs and mode are actually > > managed would also be a good idea. I really don't like the need to save > > to memory, then file, and also having to do a bit too much work in order > > to ensure that xyz lib is included by default as so on. > > > > Once you get the hang of it, things work OK, but it could be a bit > > easier... > > > > Andy > > > > On Tue, 11 Aug 2009 16:08:56 +0000 (GMT) > > abhijit biswas <abhi_tech_2004@ yahoo.co. uk> wrote: > > > > > I feel in kicad there should be a option to update the library on-line. > > > > > > As a professional PCB designer when ever I am creating a new component in > > my library I am in doubt where to save it. if I am adding a component say > > L293D I am in doubt should I save it to my extra library or should I save > > it to some standard library. > > > > > > > > > If I am adding it to a standard The next version of kicad may overwrite my > > essential component. > > > > > > If I am adding it to my extra the hierarchy of library will be destroyed, > > even it sometime conflicts with updated library, if the newer standard > > library includes that. > > > > > > > > > I think it is highly required to have a option to on-line upload the > > component to a primary on-line database, when ever a user is creating it. > > From where it can be sorted by a group of supervisors to add it in standard > > library. This will help to make kicad more popular in industry also. > > > > > > But there is also a problem for offline users. So offline users may update > > there temporary new creation whenever they are going online. > > > > > > > > > > > > See the Web's breaking stories, chosen by people like you. Check > > out Yahoo! Buzz. http://in.buzz. yahoo.com/ > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Looking for local information? Find it on Yahoo! Local > http://in.local.yahoo.com/
