Patches are bad, it seems... I don't see components anymore :((
--
Lorenzo Marcantonio
Logos Srl
___
Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers
Post to : kicad-developers@lists.launchpad.net
Unsubscribe :
Yes, I had the feeling that it was a lot of work, if it causes you trouble
may be it's just better to identifty all the affected parts and write a test
procedure that we all could replay as robots, but robots that
for sure will add their own style since we're all humans (luckily :D )
Greetings :)
On Fri, May 11, 2012 at 09:20:50AM +0200, Miguel Angel Ajo Pelayo wrote:
Yes, I had the feeling that it was a lot of work, if it causes you trouble
may be it's just better to identifty all the affected parts and write a test
procedure that we all could replay as robots, but robots that
for
2012/5/11 Lorenzo Marcantonio l.marcanto...@logossrl.com
I did banking code in COBOL for the 2K issue... there not much worse
than realigning structs by column number in a sort control card XD (I
personally 'killed' 12 customers during preproduction deployment
since they didn't match and
On Fri, May 11, 2012 at 10:11:05AM +0200, Miguel Angel Ajo Pelayo wrote:
Ohohoho 'XDDD poor clients :-D
Really fun thing is that the test environment was the *exact* copy of
the production one. So much for bank privacy!
Hehehe, I run automated tests on my client's software, every time I upload
On 10 May 2012 20:11, jean-pierre charras jp.char...@wanadoo.fr wrote:
Le 10/05/2012 11:10, Brian Sidebotham a écrit :
On 10 May 2012 09:50, Lorenzo Marcantoniol.marcanto...@logossrl.com
wrote:
On Thu, May 10, 2012 at 09:24:36AM +0100, Brian Sidebotham wrote:
Hi guys,
At some point the
Le 11/05/2012 11:27, Brian Sidebotham a écrit :
On 10 May 2012 20:11, jean-pierre charrasjp.char...@wanadoo.fr wrote:
Le 10/05/2012 11:10, Brian Sidebotham a écrit :
On 10 May 2012 09:50, Lorenzo Marcantoniol.marcanto...@logossrl.com
wrote:
On Thu, May 10, 2012 at 09:24:36AM +0100, Brian
On 05/10/2012 02:34 PM, jean-pierre charras wrote:
Le 10/05/2012 18:21, Moses McKnight a écrit :
...
In the new designs, when you add a symbol, does it have a tag telling which
library it came from? Currently if two libraries have
a part with the same name, the part will be pulled from the
On 05/11/2012 07:44 AM, Dick Hollenbeck wrote:
On 05/10/2012 02:34 PM, jean-pierre charras wrote:
Le 10/05/2012 18:21, Moses McKnight a écrit :
...
In the new designs, when you add a symbol, does it have a tag telling which
library it came from? Currently if two libraries have
a part with
On Fri, May 11, 2012 at 07:44:06AM -0500, Dick Hollenbeck wrote:
We are all entitled to our opinions. I think the current design is broken,
and the
ambiguity of which partname is chosen, is a bigger problem than any you
mention below:
The current design *has* problem; the 'cache' library
On Fri, May 11, 2012 at 07:49:54AM -0500, Dick Hollenbeck wrote:
I should also mention that ALL parts are always in the parts list with the
new design. So
the need to move parts from one library to another is significantly reduced.
But I agree
that the problem you mention needs to be
On Fri, May 11, 2012 at 08:06:29AM -0500, Dick Hollenbeck wrote:
On 05/11/2012 01:57 AM, Lorenzo Marcantonio wrote:
Keeping alterations separate is a lot of work, since refactoring tends
to be a recursive process
Agreed, it is a lot of work now. (So is reading and approving a big
Le 11/05/2012 14:44, Dick Hollenbeck a écrit :
On 05/10/2012 02:34 PM, jean-pierre charras wrote:
Le 10/05/2012 18:21, Moses McKnight a écrit :
...
In the new designs, when you add a symbol, does it have a tag telling which
library it came from? Currently if two libraries have
a part with the
On 05/11/2012 07:49 AM, Dick Hollenbeck wrote:
On 05/11/2012 07:44 AM, Dick Hollenbeck wrote:
On 05/10/2012 02:34 PM, jean-pierre charras wrote:
Le 10/05/2012 18:21, Moses McKnight a écrit :
...
In the new designs, when you add a symbol, does it have a tag telling which
library it came from?
14 matches
Mail list logo
