Hi Igor et al.,

My 2c worth:

I use a library component for every part so I rarely have more than one
footprint stored in the library, only for the cases as you suggest:
TO-220 horizontal or vertical, wave or reflow for a SMT chip part etc.
If there is only one footprint in the library and it is changed and then
an update schematic is performed it makes no sense to me, with my mode
of use, for the parts on the schematic to be left as is. They actually
end up with 2 options for the footprint one of which disappears when the
new one is selected!  Weird! It has caused many a problem for me because
it is quite a job, even with global updates, to make sure that all the
parts have ended up with the new footprint and none have been overlooked
for that last minute change...

I would like to see the Update change the footprint to the new one
corresponding to the existing one used on the schematic, remembering
that the selection from the drop-down is done on the schematic.  So if
the second footprint is used and it is changed in the library, it
changes it on the schematic to the second selection, whatever that is,
when an Update is done.

How that would affect people who use the library in another way, I am
not sure.  I think it would stuff them up because the footprint may have
been edited on the schematic, something that I never do.  Why would they
do an update?, perhaps to change the symbol or something like that, not
associated with the footprint.

I have never understood how they get any value out of having a library
if they select the footprint and possibly enter the "value" every time a
part is used, surely there is the opportunity for error every time a
component is used?  That is what I use the library to avoid.  Once the
component is correct there is no (very small) margin for error.

It seems that an option to update or not update each field of the
components on the schematic is the only way to keep everyone happy.

Cheers, Hugh.

-----Original Message-----
From: Igor Gmitrovic [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] 
Sent: Wednesday, December 04, 2002 9:57 AM
To: Protel EDA Forum
Subject: Re: [PEDA] 10 best options I want

Brad, Mike

my understanding of the question is that there are more than four
footprints that could be used for a component. Let's say a capacitor.
There are four footprint fields in the sch component library and there
couldb be 53 different footprints one uses for capacitors. There is
obviously not enough space for all of them to be defined in the sch
library component.

Let's say a cap is associated with one of the footprints apart from
those four and the sch component is changed in a library and then you
update component from the library, what happens? In my system, the
footprint info is preserved, which is what I prefer. If I want to change
the footprint info then the component's footprint field in the sch will
produce an updated list, according to updated library component, to
choose from. I would not like to have to change manually all the
different capacitors if the library component was changed. 

This is valid for generic components, such as cap. The story is
different if you have a sch library component for every capacitor you
use. It might be of some benefit if your updated sch library footprint
fields are reflected in the schematic. For me this still would not be a
good idea. I could use a reflow component on the top and a wave
footprint on the bottom and once that is set, all changes required I
would do manually, rather then having update function mess up with my

Then again, if the 'update from library' function is modified, so you
have control over what is updated in the schematic, e.g. only selected
components are updated, it could be useful, especially on large boards.

It all comes down to having a choice to do what you think is

In my opinion, what P99SE does is not a bug. It does what it is supposed
to do and I am quite happy with what it does. That we might want
something else or more is not sufficient to call it a bug. 



-----Original Message-----
From: Brad Velander [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Wednesday, 4 December 2002 8:41 AM
To: 'Protel EDA Forum'
Subject: Re: [PEDA] 10 best options I want

        I am not sure that your explanation is the same as the problem I
thought was being described. I couldn't follow your example completely
because you didn't state which footprint was the active/current
footprint after you did the update. Sounds like you thought it was a bug
just listing the two footprints. This also similarly goes back to the
"sticky" symbol issues recently discussed on the DXP list. Sticky or
non-sticky, differing opinions existed.

        The problem that I thought was described as occurring when
updating PCB. Just went back and re-read Bob's original message and
realize that I was confused by his mention of footprint and "leave it on
the board".

        I know for my own opinion, if I update symbols from the library
I expect to have brand new virgin symbol in my schematic. No remnants
from the previous iteration. Sounds like your description says we get a
hodgepodge, I will have to try it out this afternoon. Thanks.

Brad Velander.

Lead PCB Designer
Norsat International Inc.
Microwave Products
Tel   (604) 292-9089 (direct line)
Fax  (604) 292-9010

Check out our fall promotion at www.norsat.com. Limited quantities. Sale
ends December 24, 2002. Contact your Account Manager or call
1-800-NII-4LNB or email [EMAIL PROTECTED]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Mike Reagan [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Tuesday, December 03, 2002 1:03 PM
> To: 'Protel EDA Forum'
> Subject: Re: [PEDA] 10 best options I want
> Importance: High
> Brad,
> Start out with a shematic you already finished.  lets say the
> schematic, had
> an SN74LS04 with  one footprint assigned to in a LS schematic 
> lib.  The
> footprint for this part was named  SOIC14.  Now change SOIC14 
> to something
> like SOIC-14,  update the schematic from the lib.  ( or 
> globally change
> SOIC14 to SOIC-14 in schematic) .  When you look at the 
> footprints for this
> part on the schematic,  now it will still have the old SOIC14 
> along with
> SOIC-14 as a second choice.  I didnt follow schematic bugs 
> before, I am sure
> this had been reported long ago.
> sounds like it might be fixed,  this was really important for us
> Mike Reagan

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
* To post a message: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
* To leave this list visit:
* http://www.techservinc.com/protelusers/leave.html
* Contact the list manager:
* Forum Guidelines Rules:
* http://www.techservinc.com/protelusers/forumrules.html
* Browse or Search previous postings:
* http://www.mail-archive.com/proteledaforum@techservinc.com
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

Reply via email to