Re: [Kicad-developers] IPC-2581

In this case the standards document IPC2581 is freely available. Some large corporations in the EU use it but otherwise adoption is a bit slow (but hey, it took IPv6 almost 20 years to get anywhere). Years ago I was hoping to find time to implement it so that anyone required to use it for work will

Re: [Kicad-developers] IPC-2581

On 2/21/2018 8:43 PM, Ouabache Designworks wrote: > > > On Wed, Feb 21, 2018 at 3:37 PM, Wayne Stambaugh > wrote: > > I'm not opposed to KiCad taking part in this it's just a simple matter > of lack of time.  If someone else is interested in representing KiC

Re: [Kicad-developers] IPC-2581

On Wed, Feb 21, 2018 at 3:37 PM, Wayne Stambaugh wrote: > I'm not opposed to KiCad taking part in this it's just a simple matter > of lack of time. If someone else is interested in representing KiCad at > these meetings, I would not be opposed to that it's just not going to be > me. I am comple

Re: [Kicad-developers] IPC-2581

I'm not opposed to KiCad taking part in this it's just a simple matter of lack of time. If someone else is interested in representing KiCad at these meetings, I would not be opposed to that it's just not going to be me. I am completely out of free time to do any more than my current work load. C

Re: [Kicad-developers] IPC-2581

This might be a good time to discuss industry standards and how they are currently undergoing a massive change that the Kicad team could help with. Standards have in the past been created by large formal organizations like the IEEE for the entire industry.They were written in a very strict and

Re: [Kicad-developers] IPC-2581

On 21 February 2018 at 05:19, Ouabache Designworks wrote: > > Does Kicad have anyone working with these folks? > > Found this on semiwiki.com > > > Hemant enthusiastically replied, “We encourage anyone interested in > improving board design processes to join the consortium – there is no fee, > and

Re: [Kicad-developers] IPC-2581

Standardizing IPC-2581 is one thing. But I'm going to be realistic and say it'll take another decade before fabs actually upgrade to software supporting it if they even care. Many write custom software or scripts for their workflow as they hire a guy to do it part time. Other just use the cheapest

Re: [Kicad-developers] IPC-2581

On Tue, Feb 20, 2018 at 4:20 PM, Jeff Young wrote: > > Maybe we should submit the kicad board file for acceptance as the > standard. ;) > > It’s actually not a bad idea. My board house takes Gerbers or Kicad, and > nothing else. > > Plus, it’s open source, which standards bodies like. (But even

Re: [Kicad-developers] IPC-2581

On 02/20/2018 07:20 PM, Jeff Young wrote: > Maybe we should submit the kicad board file for acceptance as the standard. ;) It’s actually not a bad idea.  My board house takes Gerbers or Kicad, and nothing else. Plus, it’s open source, which standards bodies like.  (But even commercial stuf

Re: [Kicad-developers] IPC-2581

> Maybe we should submit the kicad board file for acceptance as the standard. ;) It’s actually not a bad idea. My board house takes Gerbers or Kicad, and nothing else. Plus, it’s open source, which standards bodies like. (But even commercial stuff can become a standard — I was part of the tea

Re: [Kicad-developers] IPC-2581

Standards always seem like a good idea on the surface but they don't seem to work as well in practice. On thing that is certain, gerber is still the defacto standard for having boards manufactured. Lover or hate em, they are not going anywhere any time soon. Of the few board houses that I us

Re: [Kicad-developers] IPC-2581

Looks like they have corporate and individual memberships. Individual is free and probably has no vote. Corp probably costs $$ but gives you a ballot. It would be nice if Kicad had an official rep that could attend meetings, propose rules and vote. At least that way we would know where we differed

Re: [Kicad-developers] IPC-2581

On 2018-02-20 11:19 AM, Ouabache Designworks wrote: Does Kicad have anyone working with these folks? [snip] http://www.ipc2581.com/articles-and-blogs/ I took a look at the website. It sounds interesting but they don't have a lot of information available on the site. Part of what I see is wh

Re: [Kicad-developers] IPC-2581

I don't think anything in that regard has changed since: https://lists.launchpad.net/kicad-developers/msg20588.html 2018-02-20 17:19 GMT+01:00 Ouabache Designworks : > > Does Kicad have anyone working with these folks? > > Found this on semiwiki.com > > > Hemant enthusiastically replied, *“We en

[Kicad-developers] IPC-2581

Does Kicad have anyone working with these folks? Found this on semiwiki.com Hemant enthusiastically replied, *“We encourage anyone interested in improving board design processes to join the consortium – there is no fee, and no contracts. There are both corporate and associate levels of membershi

Re: [Kicad-developers] IPC-2581

Hi Gary, I don't believe anyone currently has this in their plans but it is certainly of interest. As Wayne pointed out the chief problem is with our limited resources to devote to development tasks. At the moment features are only implemented by individuals or companies driven by their current ne

Re: [Kicad-developers] IPC-2581

Not at the current moment. Like all things open source, someone will have a need and that's most likely when it will get implemented. The only exception is if someone is willing to pay a developer to implement it. AFAIK, there hasn't been any real interest other than discussion. It's certainly s

Re: [Kicad-developers] IPC-2581

Is there serious any consideration to include support for IPC-2581 a.k.a. IEC/PAS 61182-12 in KiCad EDA? All the leading commercial software companies in the PCB Design and Fabrication space have support or a roadmap for support of this standard. The standard enables OEMs, Fabricators, and Man

[Kicad-developers] IPC-2581

re: On Sun, Sep 13, 2015 at 5:54 AM, timofonic timofonic wrote: 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