X-Authentication-Warning: delorie.com: mail set sender to geda-user-bounces using -f
X-Recipient: geda-user AT delorie DOT com
X-Envelope-From: paubert AT iram DOT es
Date: Fri, 21 Dec 2012 11:03:29 +0100
From: Gabriel Paubert <paubert AT iram DOT es>
To: geda-user AT delorie DOT com
Subject: Re: [geda-user] Find rat lines - summary
Message-ID: <20121221100329.GA4516@visitor2.iram.es>
References: <alpine DOT DEB DOT 2 DOT 00 DOT 1212120740300 DOT 26605 AT igor2priv>
 <CAN0Jx-_+HNgHFNwjNkZRos--yRa9KWLeijjaE7zh5imjp5omuw AT mail DOT gmail DOT com>
 <alpine DOT DEB DOT 2 DOT 00 DOT 1212150453530 DOT 26605 AT igor2priv>
 <CAN0Jx-8mr2XmLHr7AzcTygk205H1H4_X1Y9VcQHw3zia5eGynQ AT mail DOT gmail DOT com>
 <CAN-_CWyXNvnumf5OC+m-xRV0zMf3cCvyzLU3be_pC8DkNVZG0Q AT mail DOT gmail DOT com>
 <1355861174 DOT 13534 DOT 14 DOT camel AT localhost>
 <20121220101819 DOT GA26060 AT visitor2 DOT iram DOT es>
 <1356003432 DOT 4776 DOT 10 DOT camel AT localhost>
 <20121220122149 DOT GB20493 AT visitor2 DOT iram DOT es>
 <1356047475 DOT 5629 DOT 4 DOT camel AT localhost>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <1356047475.5629.4.camel@localhost>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.20 (2009-06-14)
X-SPF-Received: 2
X-Spamina-Bogosity: Unsure
X-Spam-Score: -1.4 (-)
X-Spam-Report: Content analysis details:   (-1.4 points)
	pts rule name              description
	---- ---------------------- --------------------------------------------------
	-1.4 ALL_TRUSTED            Passed through trusted hosts only via SMTP
Reply-To: geda-user AT delorie DOT com
Errors-To: nobody AT delorie DOT com
X-Mailing-List: geda-user AT delorie DOT com
X-Unsubscribes-To: listserv AT delorie DOT com
Precedence: bulk

On Thu, Dec 20, 2012 at 11:51:15PM +0000, Peter Clifton wrote:
> On Thu, 2012-12-20 at 13:21 +0100, Gabriel Paubert wrote:
> 
> > Well, some of my designs were broken by PCB upgrades, in the area of 
> > copper pours if I remember correctly. I always keep the photoplotter 
> > files I send to the manufacturer just in case I need a new batch (and 
> > in one case it was useful since the manufacturer of the first batch 
> > went bankrupt), but if I had to modify it...
> 
> That I'm interested about.. if you have test cases you can share (even
> privately), let me know.
> 
> Was this breakage a long time ago, around the time polygon support was
> changed from dumb flood-fill, to our current connectivity aware
> behaviour which keeps the largest clipped piece only?

Yes. 

> I know of some designs which were broken by that change. The breakage
> boils down to the fact that the "fullpoly" flag (which was introduced
> much later), should have been implemented with that original change, and
> defaulted to on, at least for polygons in files prior to the version
> where the new behaviour was added. This would preserve the old geometry.
> 

Indeed.

> If it wasn't related to this change (which I know about, and cannot
> fix), I'm very interested to see examples.

As far as I can say, it was related to that change, but the absence of
fullpoly flag at the time forced me to generate 2 polygons instead of one.
The weirdest part may have been that the two halves were actually connected
on one end through a line which had not the clearline file set.

Anyway, this was the real problem. This was also when there was only
one thermal, so I had to put copper rings around each via instead
of using the solid thermal. This may have been the cause of some connectivity
breakage.

	Regards,
	Gabriel