Hierarchical sheets - pin placement

I started with schematic capture on pc’s back in 1992, using PADS-LOGIC. With that software, when you created a hierarchical schematic, the connections to the root sheet were defined as part of the schematic, and the hierarchical sheet then appeared like a component library symbol - so when this was placed in the root schematic, the pins ( size and type) were fixed and already in place. This would be a useful addition to KiCad - though you get pretty much the same result by using block copy and paste.
[ PADS-LOGIC has dissapeared since PADS was bought by Mentor graphics]
As a new user and lleft handed, I also find that zoming wiht the mouse wheel goes the ‘wrong’ way - please can we have an option to reverse this?

2nd Feature request: It would be god to be able to copy the “footprint” filed from the pcb library inspector to paste into the footprint field in the schematic capture editor. This makes it easier to link the schematic component to the correct footprint. It would be even better to be able to browse footprints (filtered by number of pins?) from the schematic component properties editor. PADS also used to allow up to 4 alternate footprints for the same schematic symbol.
On the subject of pcb foot prints, the naming convention that seems to have been applied is resulting in some long and cumbersome names - an 0805 pad is the same for a capacitor as a resistor?

Feature request #3:
Whilst routing the board, one finds that a net was not totally connected (stops short of the pin in schematic capture). Please can we add in an add net to the edit menu? Also, PADS used to have the facility for “swapping” Gates on parts to ease routing. Whilst I’m not sure if this facility is there on Pcbnew, it was very useful. Both of these functions need to produce a “Back annotation” file that can either be automatically or manually applied to the schematic. The function of back annotation is very useful and time saving, particularly during a board development cycle.

Feature request #4: Pick radius: I can’t see any way of setting this, and the default value seems to be too small. Also, when routing tracks, if you click on an unrouted portion of a net, close to a routed portion, it would be good if the trace route picked up from the previous ‘end’ and not start in the middle…

Are you aware that this “feature request chat” is for discussions between end users, not a place to reach the developers?

You have several wishes under some of the request #'s which makes it a bit difficult to follow and comment.