Sounds reasonable. If I'm reading the comments correctly, I don't like the idea that the current proposed patch leaves footprints in a state where they cannot be selected and edited. I'm sure that will quickly produce another but report.
On 3/21/2018 1:36 PM, Seth Hillbrand wrote: > Hi Wayne- > > Perhaps there should be a clear limit to layers that remove full > footprints. Maybe only copper layers? Otherwise, a user accidentally > removing F.Mask removes most of their footprints. Warning or not, that > seems extreme. > > -S > > 2018-03-21 9:46 GMT-07:00 Wayne Stambaugh <stambau...@gmail.com > <mailto:stambau...@gmail.com>>: > > JP, > > Did you take a look at this patch? I know we have talked about this in > the past and that the fix would not be easy. Until we can define and > implement a complete solution, this could be a short term fix. When you > get a chance, please take a look at it an comment on it. > > hauptmech, > > I'm not sure about the idea of breaking a footprint (module) into layer > by layer pieces to match the removed layers. Footprints are typically > thought of as atomic objects. I wonder if it wouldn't be more prudent > to remove the footprint if any of it's layers are removed from the layer > list and warn the user that removing said layer(s) would result in > footprints being removed. > > Thanks, > > Wayne > > On 3/20/2018 4:19 AM, Eeli Kaikkonen wrote: > > 2018-03-20 0:19 GMT+02:00 Seth Hillbrand <seth.hillbr...@gmail.com > <mailto:seth.hillbr...@gmail.com> > > <mailto:seth.hillbr...@gmail.com <mailto:seth.hillbr...@gmail.com>>>: > > > > > > As it is, the patch resolves an issue and creates another. > > > > > > Actually Seth is wrong here. It doesn't create another problem. Namely, > > as the code without the patch works now, it leaves the board uneditable > > anyways, and without a warning. Just test with a footprint which has > > nothing but ref and value and one paste-only pad. It doesn't matter > > whether the pad is left there or removed after the layer is deleted. The > > footprint can't be selected or edited. > > > > I would still go with this patch, just add a sentence to the warning if > > pads are deleted. "Additionally this may lead to footprints which cannot > > be edited or deleted" or something like that. > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers > <https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers> > > Post to : kicad-developers@lists.launchpad.net > <mailto:kicad-developers@lists.launchpad.net> > > Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers > <https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers> > > More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp > <https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp> > > > > _______________________________________________ > Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers > <https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers> > Post to : kicad-developers@lists.launchpad.net > <mailto:kicad-developers@lists.launchpad.net> > Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers > <https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers> > More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp > <https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp> > > _______________________________________________ Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers Post to : kicad-developers@lists.launchpad.net Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp