Re: [Kicad-developers] Developer documentation on new website.

I did that intentionally. The front page body text page is empty, so I would rather motivate people to see the coding style policy, than an empty page. 2015-09-12 18:37 GMT+02:00 Wayne Stambaugh : > Looks good except the link points to the coding policy rather than the > top

Re: [Kicad-developers] Developer documentation on new website.

We have build instructions via Download > Source Code http://kicad-pcb.org/download/source/ ___ Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers Post to : kicad-developers@lists.launchpad.net Unsubscribe :

Re: [Kicad-developers] Developer documentation on new website.

Looks good except the link points to the coding policy rather than the top level index of the documentation. http://ci.kicad-pcb.org/job/kicad-doxygen/ws/Documentation/doxygen/html/index.html On 9/12/2015 12:11 PM, Nick Østergaard wrote: > I have added a description here: >

[Kicad-developers] Export to IPC-2581

Hello. In order to not hijack the ODB++ discussion, here's this other message. Is IPC-2581 support feasible? They mention about being open. But I'm not sure how open, because isn't an ISO/IEC/ECMA/IEEE standard and that worries me. It seems most IPC standards require certification and

Re: [Kicad-developers] FW: Export to ODB++

On Sat, Sep 12, 2015 at 06:01:30PM +0200, timofonic timofonic wrote: > I see. > > What about IPC-2581? Is really open? Do PCB manufacturers support it? IPC specs are usually open as in 'buy the paper and then you can implement it'; no consortium, no mandatory fee/royalties/whatever. As in

Re: [Kicad-developers] Reminder

I had the impression that it would be a separate branch and that a number of people would back-port any necessary patches but no new features may be introduced. I think that arrangement would keep your generic package maintainers and sysadmins happy; we've had so many complaints from people about

Re: [Kicad-developers] Developer documentation on new website.

That's fine for now. At some point, we should add some content to the top level page even if it's just a simple blurb about this being the KiCad developers documentation. At some point, I would like to port our build/install instructions and the UI policy to markdown so that also gets including

Re: [Kicad-developers] Developer documentation on new website.

I did not notice that. Maybe we should do away with the plain text install files in the source repo rather than maintain it in two places. On 9/12/2015 2:42 PM, Mark Roszko wrote: > We have build instructions via Download > Source Code > http://kicad-pcb.org/download/source/ >

Re: [Kicad-developers] Reminder

I created the new series on Lauchpad a few hours ago. I still have to decide whether to link it to the product branch or make it a separate source branch. I'm still trying to wrap my head around it as well as get these last few dialog fixes committed. On 9/12/2015 3:33 PM, Jon Neal wrote: > So

Re: [Kicad-developers] Reminder

There is a separate branch and the only back ports after the stable release will be critical bugs. As of my recent announcement, there should be some happy admins. On 9/12/2015 6:36 PM, Cirilo Bernardo wrote: > I had the impression that it would be a separate branch and that a number > of people

Re: [Kicad-developers] FW: Export to ODB++

I think a plugin would be great, if it helps bring people across to KiCad it can only be a good thing? If you look at the comparison of EDA software on Wikipedia, KiCad is one of the few that don’t support some of these formats. (side note it might be worth updating the Wikipedia page for

Re: [Kicad-developers] Reminder

As it is now it looks kind of seperate. Is that right? It makes more sense to me that the branch is branched out from product (I guess this is what you might be calling linked to). I am not too familiar with bzr. 2015-09-12 21:37 GMT+02:00 Wayne Stambaugh : > I created the

Re: [Kicad-developers] Reminder

Would be possible to also use tags in the GitHub mirror? GitHub allows you to do something like this to get a tarball: https://github.com/KiCad/kicad-source-mirror/tarball/4.0-rc1 Could potentially save some time/effort in manually maintaining tarballs? I'm not sure if Launchpad has a similar

[Kicad-developers] Any pointers to the core of this problem with DXF poly import in footprint editor?

On and off I have been looking into getting DXF drawings imported as filled polygons on copper layers. While this is working fine in pcbnew, I have been bumping into a problem doing the same the module editor. The problem is that the polygon looses the polygon coordinates on the import and

Re: [Kicad-developers] Eeschema ERC should detect unmatched local labels

On Sat, Sep 12, 2015 at 10:49:59PM -0600, Joseph Chen wrote: > Though you don't approve the change now, I hope you would approve it > sometime later soon, like maybe RC2. I am saying this because I > believe the fix is crucial for KiCAD to be improved towards a > production quality EDA, after I

[Kicad-developers] Problem of kicad-source and kicad-doc Packaging Help Documents

Is this a known issue or just me? With running KiCAD on my linux, I have long noticed that the "help documents" are not accessible by the running "KiCAD". I recently found a work-around to make them work for me. The work-around is to create some symbolic links as shown here (if your email

Re: [Kicad-developers] Eeschema ERC should detect unmatched local labels

@Wayne, Thank you for pointing to the current stable release policy and I respect you decision. Though you don't approve the change now, I hope you would approve it sometime later soon, like maybe RC2. I am saying this because I believe the fix is crucial for KiCAD to be improved towards a

Re: [Kicad-developers] [PATCH] Fixed a False BZR Version Number Built From Local Branch of GIT-Source-Mirror

@Wayne & @Nick, Attached you can find the new patch file that I've incorporated the Nick's inputs. Thanks, --Joe On 09/11/2015 08:27 AM, Wayne Stambaugh wrote: Joseph, Please make these changes and resubmit your patch and I will commit it. Thanks, Wayne On 9/11/2015 10:19 AM, Nick

Re: [Kicad-developers] FW: Export to ODB++

I see. What about IPC-2581? Is really open? Do PCB manufacturers support it? http://www.ipc-2581.com If yes: Would be possible to have the KiCad logo here eventually? http://www.ipc-2581.com/index.php/members-on-top On Sep 12, 2015 5:00 PM, "Thiadmer Riemersma"

Re: [Kicad-developers] FW: Export to ODB++

Not GPL-compatible because the restriction would apply to anyone making a derivative of KiCad as well. The only way I can see to do this is a clean-room reverse engineering, which does not appear to be feasible. On Sep 10, 2015 12:48 PM, "Mark Roszko" wrote: > Nope, you

Re: [Kicad-developers] FW: Export to ODB++

On 12.09.2015 18:04, Chris Pavlina wrote: > Not GPL-compatible because the restriction would apply to anyone making > a derivative of KiCad as well. The only way I can see to do this is a > clean-room reverse engineering, which does not appear to be feasible. Use plugins. The ODB++/IPC-2581 ones

Re: [Kicad-developers] FW: Export to ODB++

Yes, while I still strongly dislike the idea of a FOSS project encouraging that sort of licensing behavior, legally speaking that would work. Personally I would rather Mentor get stuffed with that restriction, but your 5 cents are worth more than my two. :D On Sep 12, 2015 12:11 PM, "Tomasz

Re: [Kicad-developers] Reminder

For your (and others) information, in the current moment of writing this email, there are no more critical or high bugs on the tracker. 2015-09-08 21:34 GMT+02:00 Wayne Stambaugh : > I think the current situation is as good as we can hope for as far as > blockers for rc1.

Re: [Kicad-developers] FW: Export to ODB++

> What about clean room reverse engineering? > I'd advise against this. I have browsed through the ODB+ specification. Clean room reverse engineering is a massive undertaking. ODB+ may have its advantages, but I doubt it is worth the cost of reverse engineering.