X-Authentication-Warning: delorie.com: mail set sender to geda-user-bounces using -f
X-Recipient: geda-user AT delorie DOT com
X-Original-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
        d=gmail.com; s=20120113;
        h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to
         :content-type;
        bh=3Bm6rLcU90FriS+WTvByI0AJP4CYrjXHjRM+PBwlGvU=;
        b=Gazgc5DfE2TqKoQ/gQDNx76chM55xNbJ1E2r/HI8bGNd/XuEcCahkEIxketRM1hSCF
         iNWux1oh1L4jmR+q8zEkw2YtsESLM8vr8gyY0DYUM3B5QI7zmg3XP6E1h+Tbvgg0CEXE
         7elLu+JbjcaLgsv+oSTFiF+s/WqAAe/+3W/mx9RCvwAa1FO8RFJzNw8tiWzw2LaIhOgP
         JKkVSiBw5l3siwe4frQn46SyN/W6EHrNj4eMFVdXc17V+Y+2ZcYFm8uw1UWeucQhBcSX
         8c2MteEmdaZiQtJF2v32ueM/etaykHaY3q47HJrxo6i3NWl7m6czONgBX4gdCAKmRWtT
         dXig==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
        d=1e100.net; s=20130820;
        h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date
         :message-id:subject:from:to:content-type;
        bh=3Bm6rLcU90FriS+WTvByI0AJP4CYrjXHjRM+PBwlGvU=;
        b=VgUL+ouyelHB89srd9BuXCsA1wrO4TjnhDmXyHWkWFJDmPBBbt0HORF/q/Gzpy8SRi
         4QnZtFASojn3sYOsXPt+l06nAsS4fDP5Xamt84Q774NdvZpkx+e6khM4R40M+J78KY45
         qRUBIjXmoNKfI4Hnm5YOWLwuR0hJz8vzij/T02PzdKTRalCCCdQiJo/WKS0q+Lo1f1TR
         nJ2lB43Tel9LBTOxjs3crkaqy/YvdmqiT73mwBHbgCgzH00gbi1cRamwZkKfadzk3lfh
         aH3D7qOL6OwZet84a/Bfu3AjqJ4USnsR3rXS/Vs7YQm3LyoYnFQu8ihQfp1G/MCME/iB
         8dzQ==
X-Gm-Message-State: AG10YOQ2FUnD9RYr9rImmcZhOmKU2ts4P+9Z+0MFWTNKub4M/WEjF6Nb4RgKrmgGFYaCt3+O0jGRm5pihb6rww==
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.55.75.77 with SMTP id y74mr29337042qka.19.1453829418553;
 Tue, 26 Jan 2016 09:30:18 -0800 (PST)
In-Reply-To: <20160126124701.0d061912c7e078ced9d4e6cb@gmail.com>
References: <alpine DOT DEB DOT 2 DOT 00 DOT 1601180756390 DOT 9035 AT igor2priv>
	<alpine DOT DEB DOT 2 DOT 00 DOT 1601260416150 DOT 9035 AT igor2priv>
	<56A751EC DOT 8030402 AT iae DOT nl>
	<20160126124701 DOT 0d061912c7e078ced9d4e6cb AT gmail DOT com>
Date: Tue, 26 Jan 2016 12:30:18 -0500
Message-ID: <CANEvwqgs3YFnt7m8mA1DN6X2KdWbyr4zpXCVH321vDo1f7CyxA@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [geda-user] [pcb] poll: burried/blind vias vs. pcb and pcb-rnd
 (How ?)
From: "Marvin Dickens (mpdickens AT gmail DOT com) [via geda-user AT delorie DOT com]" <geda-user AT delorie DOT com>
To: geda-user <geda-user AT delorie DOT com>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001a114ab0480eb1ff052a400a2a
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

--001a114ab0480eb1ff052a400a2a
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8

In this day and age to say blind/buried vias are not needed is ridiculous.
The fact is ANY design that requires even one FPGA, custom ASIC or
medium to large BGA needs blind/buried vias.

This is factual and is easy vetted.

Regards

Marvin

On Tue, Jan 26, 2016 at 6:47 AM, Nicklas Karlsson (
nicklas DOT karlsson17 AT gmail DOT com) [via geda-user AT delorie DOT com] <
geda-user AT delorie DOT com> wrote:

> > The conclusion from the poll is also that there is no strong demand to
> > support/provide windows binaries.
> >
> > However IMO blind/burried vias and windows availability are essential to
> > attract new users, I do hope that that broader scope is picked-up by
> > main stream pcb.
> >
> > Cheers,
> > Robert.
>
> Even though it should not be implemented right now it could be good with a
> discussion how it ideally should work.
>
> An essential question is how it should be defined in pcb. On a higher
> level I could see a choice between the layers in form of board/laminate it
> make hole in or to define between which layers it should be
> drilled/connected. I could identify three different implementation methods
> immediately:
>   1. Define on which layers there should be a hole.
>   2. Define between which copper layer via should be.
>   3. In principal define which layers should be connected by connecting on
> the particular layer.
>
> Number (3.) may be good because layers needed to span will be implicitly
> given by on which layer via is used but there are a few problems:
>   1. Then there are two different via above each other that do not
> connect, how to handle for the user?
>   2. Snap to via, how to choose between bypass and connect?
> Then it is implicitly given which layer need to connect I guess the
> minimum possible layers to span for the current design could be chosen
> automatically for the most common cases although it would still be possible
> to implement override if needed.
>
> Nicklas Karlsson
>

--001a114ab0480eb1ff052a400a2a
Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<div dir=3D"ltr">In this day and age to say blind/buried vias are not neede=
d is ridiculous.<div>The fact is ANY design that requires even one FPGA, cu=
stom ASIC or</div><div>medium to large BGA needs blind/buried vias.</div><d=
iv><br></div><div>This is factual and is easy vetted.</div><div><br></div><=
div>Regards</div><div><br></div><div>Marvin</div></div><div class=3D"gmail_=
extra"><br><div class=3D"gmail_quote">On Tue, Jan 26, 2016 at 6:47 AM, Nick=
las Karlsson (<a href=3D"mailto:nicklas DOT karlsson17 AT gmail DOT com">nicklas.karls=
son17 AT gmail DOT com</a>) [via <a href=3D"mailto:geda-user AT delorie DOT com">geda-use=
r AT delorie DOT com</a>] <span dir=3D"ltr">&lt;<a href=3D"mailto:geda-user AT delori=
e.com" target=3D"_blank">geda-user AT delorie DOT com</a>&gt;</span> wrote:<br><bl=
ockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #=
ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">&gt; The conclusion from the poll is also that =
there is no strong demand to<br>
&gt; support/provide windows binaries.<br>
&gt;<br>
&gt; However IMO blind/burried vias and windows availability are essential =
to<br>
&gt; attract new users, I do hope that that broader scope is picked-up by<b=
r>
&gt; main stream pcb.<br>
&gt;<br>
&gt; Cheers,<br>
&gt; Robert.<br>
<br>
Even though it should not be implemented right now it could be good with a =
discussion how it ideally should work.<br>
<br>
An essential question is how it should be defined in pcb. On a higher level=
 I could see a choice between the layers in form of board/laminate it make =
hole in or to define between which layers it should be drilled/connected. I=
 could identify three different implementation methods immediately:<br>
=C2=A0 1. Define on which layers there should be a hole.<br>
=C2=A0 2. Define between which copper layer via should be.<br>
=C2=A0 3. In principal define which layers should be connected by connectin=
g on the particular layer.<br>
<br>
Number (3.) may be good because layers needed to span will be implicitly gi=
ven by on which layer via is used but there are a few problems:<br>
=C2=A0 1. Then there are two different via above each other that do not con=
nect, how to handle for the user?<br>
=C2=A0 2. Snap to via, how to choose between bypass and connect?<br>
Then it is implicitly given which layer need to connect I guess the minimum=
 possible layers to span for the current design could be chosen automatical=
ly for the most common cases although it would still be possible to impleme=
nt override if needed.<br>
<span class=3D"HOEnZb"><font color=3D"#888888"><br>
Nicklas Karlsson<br>
</font></span></blockquote></div><br></div>

--001a114ab0480eb1ff052a400a2a--