Mail Archives: geda-user/2014/06/28/12:15:23
> A question still unclear in my head.. should we define a pad stack
> which has the relevant properties / pad geometry, and call that out
> repeatedly, OR.. should we continue in PCB's current approach, and
> have every single via entity describe these aspects individually.
I've used both types of tools, and IMHO it's better to have a "canned"
geometry that you can reference, as well as making exceptions.
Sketchup has a good implementation of this, but lacks a way of finding
all features that are exceptions.
> I really wish PCB didn't have the concept of layer groups to
> complicate this. They are REALLY unhelpful. Plain _layers_, defined
> to be in a particular numerical order through the board stack-up
> would be a MUCH easier model to use.
We'd still need a way to have one layer be composed of different
things-that-become-gerbers. An obvious example of this is the
top/bottom layers, which have copper, mask, paste, and silk.
> then the board stack-up of is considered to be the numerical
> sequence (either ascending or descending) of these two layer-groups
> and any in between.
Photo mode does this too, and OSH Park interprets PCB layouts this
way.
- Raw text -