X-Authentication-Warning:	delorie.com: mail set sender to geda-user-bounces using -f
X-Recipient:	geda-user AT delorie DOT com
DKIM-Signature:	v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
	d=gmail.com; s=20120113;
	h=date:from:to:subject:message-id:mail-followup-to:references
	:mime-version:content-type:content-disposition:in-reply-to
	:user-agent;
	bh=jifJ9STEDIihwoAzOY0kbg5Ifw9hGHakRBAfs7O6DGw=;
	b=QPBiv2M5w4VvLfx52ds/EHZ1izmY6triHCJ/+kaHZDir5MGWkG00zy/yUowdPgi2xO
	C+L8+FBKM65EjBYisxY8y1AICwIl7HN6hCGYz4uvPRi2FJ+Qu9d1TvLgg+JDdFMlTMoo
	RMaOrtJpSEzG2WLpgjln5OJy2RMTwpQ55Z6SbqbNoBjQ/rCYdO77xcLrwM0JnsPQE+1b
	r3fxfEXtIq9aeD1KvwTKVphyahqECH26Uv55cLSLP+K/Xp0r9ZHbeLxE1WPKjWUkKCvU
	1MkMY7MxY0BfwA1L/zLxCb2w33D3jf7NwLEbUrkY585rOI5VmdHF9I/71O5ooIzz2XOg
	4oUg==
X-Received:	by 10.152.120.8 with SMTP id ky8mr479979lab.118.1427137353399;
	Mon, 23 Mar 2015 12:02:33 -0700 (PDT)
Date:	Mon, 23 Mar 2015 22:02:31 +0300
From:	Vladimir Zhbanov <vzhbanov AT gmail DOT com>
To:	geda-user AT delorie DOT com
Subject:	Re: [geda-user] A Python Gerber writer
Message-ID:	<20150323190231.GB2429@localhost.localdomain>
Mail-Followup-To:	geda-user AT delorie DOT com
References:	<CAOFvGD7aLirsi6WLAgSLZinM4FUHVBYm+_KTUnj9KeLm_i_1Bw AT mail DOT gmail DOT com>
	<CAPYb0EHy82EtBZRrLkdukDth14zhvGiFmEh7mnuvajCRpgC-aw AT mail DOT gmail DOT com>
MIME-Version:	1.0
In-Reply-To:	<CAPYb0EHy82EtBZRrLkdukDth14zhvGiFmEh7mnuvajCRpgC-aw@mail.gmail.com>
User-Agent:	Mutt/1.5.23 (2014-03-12)
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

On Sun, Mar 22, 2015 at 03:24:46PM -0400, Bob Paddock wrote:
> >while toying around with the idea of creating a
> > gerber writer in python. This is in order to facilitate the goal of
> > creating multilayer PCBs with buried vias.
> 
> Great work.  Would be nice to end up with a true gerber editor in
> addition to blind/buried vias.
> 
> Anyone know of a board house that doesn't up the price by %150 when using them?
> 
> For historical reference, I don't know if it is still in the patch
> tracker now or not:
> 
> On Mon, Aug 22, 2011 at 6:54 AM, Andrew Poelstra <asp11 AT sfu DOT ca> wrote:
> > On Sun, Aug 21, 2011 at 01:30:57AM -0400, Gus Fantanas wrote:
> 
> >> While following the discussion about layers, I wondered if the
> >> capability to handle buried/blind vias could be implemented in gEDA.
> >
> > This would require core layer-handling changes.
> 
> The patch to add Blind/Buried vias has been suffering from Bit Rot on
> Source Forge for years.
> It was last rebased about a year ago:
> 
> [This link no longer works.  Is there an active archive of these old messages?]
> 
> http://www.seul.org/pipermail/geda-user/2010-July/047949.html

This?
http://article.gmane.org/gmane.comp.cad.geda.user/31240

Regards,
  Vladimir

- Raw text -