Well even if that many users use S100 stuff, I think it is important just to have it in a centralized library.
Perhaps it can be organized under categories, like motherboard busses and under that you will find footprints for: 1. ISA 2. EISA 3. VESA 4. IBM MicroChannel 5. PCI 6. PCI Express 7. S-100 Maybe we can even have a "Wizard" that will ask you for the number of pins, the spacing between pads, the size of the pad..etc and the Wizard will automatically generate a footprint file!! _____ From: kicad-users@yahoogroups.com [mailto:kicad-us...@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of lynchaj Sent: Tuesday, February 02, 2010 3:30 PM To: kicad-users@yahoogroups.com Subject: [kicad-users] Re: KiCAD Parts Repo [was: S-100 and ECB homebrew computer templates for KiCAD/FreeRouting.net] Hi! That sounds like a good idea but I am not a KiCAD developer or library maintainer. I'm not suggesting to build up a common parts library infrastructure although that would be very helpful if such a thing existed. www.kicadlib.org is helpful but what you are describing is much more involved. I suspect we've all probably "reinvented the wheel" along the way at least once or twice. Basically I'm just an enthusiastic amateur homebrew computer builder. My home brew computer information is free and might be useful to others with similar interests. I've made several custom parts for S-100 connectors, board outlines, templates, and a lot of tweaks to Z80, 6809, and related vintage/classic computers. However it is kind of a specialty niche and is clearly not going to appeal to the wider KiCAD audience. S-100 stuff isn't exactly common these days... I am fairly sure none of my stuff would stand up to any sort of "audit" without major corrections. It's just the starting point not a completed works. For example, I've never made a 3D model since I haven't seen a need for one. The S-100 bus connector footprint works just fine and I know what it is on the PCB enough for it to be useful. The same for Propeller DIP, SY6545, and other custom parts libraries. What I have would be a useful starting point for another interested hobbyist but not sufficient for inclusion in any sort of official KiCAD part distribution, IMO. I guess I had more of a "template" approach in mind. Start with a sample board, rip out the parts you don't want, put in the stuff you do want, make adjustments, make your own board, build, test, pass it along to the next person kind of a deal. I hope this clarifies my intent. If there are other home brew computer enthusiasts using KiCAD please let me know and I might be able to help out with a somewhat better starting point than completely from scratch. Thanks and have a nice day! Andrew Lynch --- In kicad-users@ <mailto:kicad-users%40yahoogroups.com> yahoogroups.com, Andy Eskelson <andyya...@...> wrote: > > This was discussed some time ago as I remember.... > > As a matter of interest, who run kicadlib.org s that would seem to be an > obvious starting place. > > I don;t think an automated system will work 100% but it is the obvious > route for most operations. > > You would probably end up with a two stage system. The "normal" system > where things are uploaded by contrib. when can be anyone, then a second > set which has been audited as ok and locked to prevent any changes to > the list. (obviously what a user does after download is up to them) > > What you must not allow is parts to be uploaded under any name or > description, that causes chaos, so whatever system you use must allocate > the critical names and identifiers. I've seen the results of allowing > people to do that, and it's not nice - people would fill in equipment > records with things like Cisco Hub, cisco switch, cis. switch and so on. > This made finding things very hard. That was soon changes to a drop down > list so that everyone picked the same name for a particular equipment > type. > > The hardest part is just defining the minimum requirements that you > really need. A part is only one file, and a module is maybe two if you > include a 3d file as well. Including an image of the part or mod might be > something to think about but that's open to debate. > > You also need to define a set of criteria that defines when a part is > deemed to be audited as OK. It will not be sufficient to say that x > people have use it, and say OK, as an example from the group over the > past few weeks, a member found a problem where the silk screen covered > the pads. Not an obvious thing to think of, but important for pcb > production house builds. > > What you really want to avoid is getting bogged down in details that make > things overly complex. > > > Andy > >
