On 4 September 2014 10:03, Maciej Sumiński wrote:
> On 09/03/2014 10:36 PM, Wayne Stambaugh wrote:
>> On 9/3/2014 12:33 PM, Brian Sidebotham wrote:
>>> I think we could do it in a similar fashion to EESCHEMA (it's a
>>> more pleasant experience when things work in a similar way) Any
>>> vertexes o
On Sat, Sep 06, 2014 at 10:11:25AM +0200, jp charras wrote:
> Only the board designer can do this kind of change.
The board designer then is better fixing his board:P
I'm fine with automatic 'plugging' but it should give a message like
'added a segment to fix outline at @,@'; so if you don't care
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 09/06/2014 10:11 AM, jp charras wrote:
> Le 03/09/2014 18:03, Maciej Sumiński a écrit :
>>> On Wed, Sep 03, 2014 at 10:22:03AM +0200, Maciej Sumiński
>>> wrote:
Healing could be done another way. Instead of moving
vertices, it could be bet
Le 03/09/2014 18:03, Maciej Sumiński a écrit :
>> On Wed, Sep 03, 2014 at 10:22:03AM +0200, Maciej Sumiński wrote:
>>> Healing could be done another way. Instead of moving vertices,
>>> it could be better to add the missing segments. If they are no
>>> longer than a line thickness, then it is not
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 09/03/2014 10:36 PM, Wayne Stambaugh wrote:
> On 9/3/2014 12:33 PM, Brian Sidebotham wrote:
>> I think we could do it in a similar fashion to EESCHEMA (it's a
>> more pleasant experience when things work in a similar way) Any
>> vertexes on the Edge
Excellent suggestions. This seems like a reasonable path forward. I
really like the snapping idea as an easy way to close the vertices. I
always have to manually go back and use the segment properties to make
sure each vertex ends at the same point if I don't get them right the
first time. Sho
On 9/3/2014 12:33 PM, Brian Sidebotham wrote:
> On 3 September 2014 17:03, Maciej Sumiński wrote:
>> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
>> Hash: SHA1
>>
>>> On Wed, Sep 03, 2014 at 10:22:03AM +0200, Maciej Sumiński wrote:
Healing could be done another way. Instead of moving vertices,
it
On Wed, Sep 03, 2014 at 01:56:11PM -0400, Jean-Paul Louis wrote:
> The edge.cut layer is a nice addition, but lacks real drawing tools.
I wouldn't call it an addition, it's there right from the beginning:P
> I do not understand why we have an ARC and CIRCLE drawing tool, but no
> RECTANGLE tool.
The edge.cut layer is a nice addition, but lacks real drawing tools.
I do not understand why we have an ARC and CIRCLE drawing tool, but no
RECTANGLE tool.
That would make life a lot easier. Creating a rectangle with a polyline tool is
always a pain if you use a small grid.
I would really like a
On Wed, Sep 03, 2014 at 05:33:09PM +0100, Brian Sidebotham wrote:
> I don't think there's any reason to have disconnected vertexes on the
> Edge.Cuts layer is there? Perhaps for drawing a rout line, but then I
> draw a rectangle with the correct width of the router bit I want used
> so it is less a
On 3 September 2014 17:03, Maciej Sumiński wrote:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA1
>
>> On Wed, Sep 03, 2014 at 10:22:03AM +0200, Maciej Sumiński wrote:
>>> Healing could be done another way. Instead of moving vertices,
>>> it could be better to add the missing segments. If they a
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
> On Wed, Sep 03, 2014 at 10:22:03AM +0200, Maciej Sumiński wrote:
>> Healing could be done another way. Instead of moving vertices,
>> it could be better to add the missing segments. If they are no
>> longer than a line thickness, then it is not notic
On Wed, Sep 03, 2014 at 10:22:03AM +0200, Maciej Sumiński wrote:
> I have never tried to order a T-shaped cut. What is the exact issue
> with that? I am wondering if it is still a real problem if the
> protruding part was within the Edge.Cuts line thickness (let's say 0.1
> mm).
The problem is not
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 09/03/2014 08:54 AM, Lorenzo Marcantonio wrote:
> Pondered some more about the issue.
>
> Accepting the edges within a tolerance doesn't seem to be a good
> solution... explanation:
>
> When generating gerbers/specctra/IDF whatever they want the
Pondered some more about the issue.
Accepting the edges within a tolerance doesn't seem to be a good
solution... explanation:
When generating gerbers/specctra/IDF whatever they want the 'true
vertices' to make, essentially a toolpath. And that must be valid and
manufacturable; for example given a
On Tue, Sep 02, 2014 at 03:06:25PM -0700, Cirilo Bernardo wrote:
> I have suggested a solution for this before, but my proposal does break
> previous behavior and will require changes in many parts of the source.
How could break previous behaviour when previous behaviour is not
present? *Convertin
- Original Message -
> From: jp charras
> To: kicad-developers@lists.launchpad.net
> Cc:
> Sent: Wednesday, September 3, 2014 4:04 AM
> Subject: Re: [Kicad-developers] Edge.Cuts layer in the module editor
>
> Le 02/09/2014 18:57, Wayne Stambaugh a écrit :
&g
Le 02/09/2014 20:16, Maciej Sumiński a écrit :
> On 09/02/2014 08:04 PM, jp charras wrote:
>> Orson, Be careful with Edge.Cuts layer in modules. If they are
>> not currently allowed, this is because I have a good reason.
>
>> In specctra export, and therefore in 3d viewer, we *need* a
>> closed po
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 09/02/2014 08:04 PM, jp charras wrote:
> Orson, Be careful with Edge.Cuts layer in modules. If they are not
> currently allowed, this is because I have a good reason.
>
> In specctra export, and therefore in 3d viewer, we *need* a closed
> polygo
Le 02/09/2014 18:57, Wayne Stambaugh a écrit :
> On 9/1/2014 5:48 AM, Maciej Sumiński wrote:
>> It has been already a few weeks since the GAL module editor has been
>> merged. Among the introduced changes, there is support for Edge.Cuts
>> layer in modules.
>> As I have not received any bug reports
On Tue, Sep 02, 2014 at 12:57:28PM -0400, Wayne Stambaugh wrote:
> I fine with it. I think have board edges in footprints makes sense.
Already discussed to death in the past why it's useful and what are the
problems... just check that the edges are collected when building the
outline for export/d
On 9/1/2014 5:48 AM, Maciej Sumiński wrote:
> It has been already a few weeks since the GAL module editor has been
> merged. Among the introduced changes, there is support for Edge.Cuts
> layer in modules.
> As I have not received any bug reports related to the feature, does
> anyone mind if I remo
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
It has been already a few weeks since the GAL module editor has been
merged. Among the introduced changes, there is support for Edge.Cuts
layer in modules.
As I have not received any bug reports related to the feature, does
anyone mind if I remove the
23 matches
Mail list logo
