Hey there,
What is the intended structure of libraries for the database driver? I am currently moving from our own solution to the integration database driver and I am wordering what the developers had in mind when creating the config structure. The problem I am facing is that it feels kinda cumbersome to add one Library Entry into the json list for Each “category” (R,C,L,Mechanical,…).
Problem:
- I need to copy the fields list for each category, since every category needs its own library entry. Adding one field, or changing something is a pain in the butt, since it needs to be manually repeated for each library
- I need the create a seperate view for each category, since every library needs it’s own table. This gets messy and is again an cumbersome process
More elegant solution would be:
- Having a seperate list of field configurations, and choose one for each library entry. Or move the fields list above the libraries in terms of hirachy (I think that would be cumbersome for other users with different database structure
- Having a simple “filter” column for each library would be great, so that there is no need to create and maintain a separate view for each entry
Soo either I am understanding the intention wrong or I think there is something to improve in the configuration structure. At least for use there is (currently) no need to have a different configuration for each entry. Coming from Altium and their db integration all part information is aggregated into a single database view. So connecting is just about mapping the columns to fields,attributes,etc
I think that could be very similar for a lot of users trying der best to migrate away from Altium 
I am curious to here where others are coming from! Sure if you setup up a new library structure anyway, you probably don’t mind, but having to migrate over a timespan where both the old and new Software needs to be connected to the same source is probably for a lot of people from interest.