Mike, although I'm not a frequent active KiCAD user, I have to say that I really like your idea. Implementation details put aside for this "pre-conceptional phase", combining user efforts into a central repository is, IMO, the way to go. Not only for program source code, but also for documentation and libraries, i.e. schematic symbols and footprints.
I especially like your rating idea to build up trust for part definitions. Points raised like how to keep local copies, how to avoid or to allow local precedences... all these should be a conceptual problems that have been solved (successfully, I hope) before with other projects, I think. To make a point: I would even consider donating for bandwidth needed to establish such a service... -Martin Mike Payson wrote: > I'm curious about something. I'm an Eagle user, but I recently > subscribed to this list out of curiosity. I've played with KiCAD for a > few minutes, but not yet tackled any real projects with it. One of the > main roadblocks has been the lack of libraries, though I recently > found out you can convert Eagle Libraries which makes things easier. > > Anyway, I have an idea for what I think would be a much better way to > support part libraries, so I thought I'd throw it out and see what > people think. In my experience, part libraries are a huge pain. You > have to search for the correct part, which may or may not be listed as > being present in a particular library. If you find it, you can't count > on it having been done correctly, so you have to compare the part to > the datasheet to double check. Even if you find a good part, there is > a good chance that the schematic symbol is badly designed, etc. And if > you manage to fix any of these problems in your local copies, you need > to start over when a new version is released. Libraries are great if > they are coming from a definitive source who does a good job > assembling them (such as if Atmel released and maintained their own > AVR library), but when they are OS, their are a ton of potential > issues. > > Instead of having traditional monolithic libraries, it seems to me > this is the ideal place for a web-based system. In this system, the > part footprint would be separated from the part itself, so all TQFP32, > .8mm pitch parts would use the same footprint (I think KiCAD already > does this). Right there you eliminate a lot of potential issues. For > the parts themselves, instead of having an AVR library (for example), > each individual part would be available via a web-based service. > Instead of downloading the AVR library, you would download the > ATMega32 part. This makes it much easier to find your exact part, and > also means that only one person ever needs to create a particular > part. > > If that part is not already available, you create and submit it as > normal, and it's available for the next guy, however it is marked as > an untested part. Each part will have a 'trustworthy' rating, and > until a certain number of people vote that the part is correct, it > will remain flagged as suspect so people will know to double check the > datasheet. If there are problems with a part, anyone can update the > part to fix them, and their changes would automatically be shared. The > parts are versioned Wiki-style, so the old version always remains > available if changes are made. The user would be prompted that the new > version is available and allowed to change or not, so this would not > break existing designs due to minor corrections. > > Some other thoughts: > * Though the footprint is standardized, the individual part does have > the ability to override each layer of the standard part if necessary, > so if a particular part has a specific solder mask requirement, for > example, you can modify that layer while still using the standard > footprint. > > * This allows people to easily share part documentation and tips, > reference schematics, etc, since they can be easily attached to the > part itself. > > * This would be web-based, but there would be a browser integrated > into the library browser, so you could add any part directly from > within the program. > > * This would not replace the existing library system, at least not at > first. You can easily export the web-library for off-line usage. > > * The parts would still be organized into library-like categories, to > make things easy to find. Parts could also be tagged to make things > even easier. > > So any thoughts or comments? > > > ------------------------------------ > > Please read the Kicad FAQ in the group files section before posting your > question. > Please post your bug reports here. They will be picked up by the creator of > Kicad. > Please visit http://www.kicadlib.org for details of how to contribute your > symbols/modules to the kicad library. > For building Kicad from source and other development questions visit the > kicad-devel group at http://groups.yahoo.com/group/kicad-develYahoo! Groups > Links > > >
