BOM including parts labelled as Exclude-from-BOM

Manufacturing
1

On KC 9.0.1, the BOM exporting tab is including parts that are flagged as “Exclude from BOM”. It seems to obey the setting from the other tab, the checkbox indicating “Show Exclude from BOM” — but that does not seem right; it’s one thing to show things that are flagged as “Exclude from BOM”; but it’s a very different thing to include in the BOM things that are flagged as “Exclude from BOM” simply because the user wanted to see them.

Application: KiCad x86_64 on x86_64

Version: 9.0.1-9.0.1-0~ubuntu24.04.1, release build

Libraries:
	wxWidgets 3.2.4
	FreeType 2.13.2
	HarfBuzz 8.3.0
	FontConfig 2.15.0
	libcurl/8.5.0 OpenSSL/3.0.13 zlib/1.3 brotli/1.1.0 zstd/1.5.5 libidn2/2.3.7 libpsl/0.21.2 (+libidn2/2.3.7) libssh/0.10.6/openssl/zlib nghttp2/1.59.0 librtmp/2.3 OpenLDAP/2.6.7

Platform: Ubuntu 24.04.2 LTS, 64 bit, Little endian, wxGTK, X11, ubuntu, x11

Build Info:
	Date: Mar 30 2025 15:48:27
	wxWidgets: 3.2.4 (wchar_t,wx containers) GTK+ 3.24
	Boost: 1.83.0
	OCC: 7.6.3
	Curl: 8.5.0
	ngspice: 42
	Compiler: GCC 13.3.0 with C++ ABI 1018
	KICAD_IPC_API=ON

Locale: 
	Lang: en_US
	Enc: UTF-8
	Num: 1,234.5
	Encoded кΩ丈: D0BACEA9E4B888 (sys), D0BACEA9E4B888 (utf8)
2

Both tabs (“Edit” tab and “Export” tab) belong together.
If you enable/disable columns in the “Edit” tab this affects the content in the export tab.
If you change the sorting in the “Edit” tab this affects the sorting of the exported data.
So for me it’s consistent behaviour that also all checkboxes (exclude DNP, Show Exclude from BOM, grouping checkbox) affect both tabs.

3

I disagree for two reasons; one is what I already mentioned in my initial message — really, it is one thing to show parts marked as excluded from BOM … but we’re talking about including on the exported BOM the parts marked as Exclude from BOM !! How can that not be seen as unconditionally wrong?

The second reason is that the checkbox actually disappears when you go to the Export tab. Suggesting that the two tabs are two separate things! In my view, they are entirely different things!! One is to Edit things; you can set symbols’ attributes, individually or in bulk, you’re editing the schematic … That is entirely different from the Export tab, where you’re producing a fabrication output. Consistent with my idea that these are two entirely independent things: the interface for both is completely different (the only common thing are the buttons at the bottom-right side). The Edit side shows a grid, controls on what to show and how to group them, etc. The Export tab shows settings to control the attributes of the output file, and it shows you a non-editable preview of what the output file will be.

In my opinion, it makes absolutely no sense to apply a control from the other tab, let alone a control that contradicts a very explicit setting on parts — and as mentioned above, to make it even worse, a control that does not even show when you’re on this tab. If anything, I would agree that it makes sense to show on the export tab that button, but relabelled as “Override Exclude-from-BOM setting” (because, again, that checkbox says Show, which is not the same as Include in the exported file). Giving the user the option to override the setting could make sense (on very rare occasions, I would expect, but still).

Apologies for my somewhat hostile tone … I’m just shocked to find disagreement with something that in my mind holds in such an unqualified, unconditional way!

4

That doesn’t happen in V8.0.9, have you exported a BOM and checked in V9 ?

I can understand “Exclude from bill of materials” items being shown in the Symbol Fields Table - Export tab but I agree they have no place in the actual BOM file itself.

5

That doesn’t happen in V8.0.9, have you exported a BOM and checked in V9 ?

The checkbox in question was not available in v8.
In v8 all symbols (including the “exclude from BOM”) showed up in the “Edit” pane, it was not possible to suppress the “exclude from BOM” symbols to reduce the number of shown symbols.

As I stated above in my opinion the behaviour is consistent, contrary to the opinion of the OP.
All settings made on the first pane (“Edit”) influence the output:

  • which columns are shown (enabled/disabled)
  • sorting order of of shown columns (sorting left<–>right as well as top<–>bottom)
  • scope setting radio button (all sheets, current subsheet only)
  • checkbox DNP
  • checkbox “Group”
  • checkbox “Show Exclude from BOM”

The result of all these settings then is shown in the second “export” panel, which holds the file settings (comma, colon, semicolon, and so on) and shows a preview of the exported data.

For me it would be not consistent if all settings influence the output, but only the checkbox “Show Exclude from BOM” does not influence the output data.
Maybe the wording of “Show Exclude from BOM” is unlucky, but then a good alternative descriptive (but also short) phrase would be needed.

6

I think the inconsistency goes deeper than just this behaviour; I find that the two tabs do not belong together. It didn’t bother me at first; I just found it an easy/convenient way for you guys (the developers) to implement a native BOM generation (no plugins). But I do still see the purposes of both tabs to be rather incompatible. The grid view is for bulk-editing symbol attributes. Generating a BOM is such a distinct/disconnected action!

I think this is really the source of the “paradox” that we’re seeing: on the one hand, what you say is true, that if all the settings from one tab affect the other tab, then having ONE setting that doesn’t introduces inconsistency. But then, again, I’m still baffled that you see that detail as having precedence over the inconsistency of seeing a BOM file that includes parts that I marked as Exclude-from-BOM.

Another random thought is that, really, there should be no option to override that setting. The part itself does not go in the BOM!! Why would a “Show” setting in some dialog box make parts that do not belong in the BOM make it to the BOM? I guess what I’m saying is: I’m emphasizing the aspect that exclude-from-BOM is an attribute of the part, and not a setting in the BOM generation functionality.

Regardless of my observations above, if the developers decide that this will not be changed, and answering your request for an alternative phrasing: maybe “Override Exclude-from-BOM” could make sense? it makes it more explicit that the user does want to include those (for wahetever reason, likely just to view/edit them)

However, one detail that I think is more critical is: the checkbox SHOULD SHOW on the Export tab. In recent days, I found myself going insane, thinking I was losing my mind when finding those excluded-from-BOM items in the generated BOM file. I then realized that I (much earlier) had checked the box while in the Edit tab, because I wanted to change the footprint for all mounting holes.

7

I mostly agree with you @cal-linux . Feel free to give this issue a +1: Symbol Fields Table "Show 'Exclude from BOM'" behavior (#19902) · Issues · KiCad / KiCad Source Code / kicad · GitLab

2 Likes
8

Just voted for that issue, I stumbled across the very same thing =) I agree that what is “shown” to what goes into the BOM are two distict things and while I might want to hide excluded parts from the grid view, I expect that “excluded from BOM” is ALWAYS excluded from BOM, independent of the “view settings”. :wink:

1 Like
9

Ok, I see that the issue had been raised.

However, it won’t let me upvote it (or vote at all)

10

You’ll need to be logged in with a gitlab account to vote. Otherwise there shouldn’t be any restrictions.