Planned maintenance.
Indeed. Gitlab was expected to be down for a few hours for maintenance.
(It already seems to work again though, and the “maintenance message” is gone.
I do agree that library management in KiCad is a bit shitty at the moment, but I also guess that opening issues for it on gitlab will not be very productive. Changes in library management also have to fit in with the direction in which the “lead developers” want to go with KiCad. For example they are working in adding some system in which library management can be database driven, and that is a long term goal.
But apart from that, you apparently have some misconceptions.
The overwhelmingly common pin numbering for TO-110 is pin numbers, 1, 2, 3 from left to right when you have the text readable in front of you, and deviating from that is … unusual at best. Therefore, the proper way is to adjust the pin numbering in the schematic symbols.
I agree that library management is far form optimal, but it’s not that bad either.
Library management is a two step process. You first have to manually add the library itself to KiCad (either global or project specific), and then you can use the symbol and footprint editors to copy symbols and footprints between libraries. For footprints you also have the option to use a normal file manager, because a Footprint Library is just a directory and each footprint is a separate file.
1 Like
IMHO For something like EDA, this is actually a terrible idea. With such an idea there is no standardization in stored data. I’ve seen enough cddb entries to know that no one follows any style-guide, and there are plenty of small errors when comparing the downloaded cd data to the printed cd liner that I have in my hand. For organizing music libraries, that isn’t a big deal (unless you are like me and only use the cddb entry as a starting point and normalize to my own informal style guide). But for EDA, that can lead to expensive mistakes. It would almost be like writing a paper where every word can have a different font. Yeah, it works, but it can be hard to read.
The KiCad libraries are at least in part user submitted. But we have some volunteer librarians who ensure that any submissions that make it into inclusion follow the KiCad Library Conventions (KLC), i.e. a single style guide. More details on how to contribute to the KiCad standard libraries can be found here:
Unfortunately, the librarian team is small (I honestly don’t know how many there are, but I could probably count them on one hand), and all volunteer. The number of submissions (and fixes to existing library assets) easily out-strips the available time that the librarian team has. At then end of the basics of contributing page are some suggestions on how to get further involved in the team if you feel strongly enough to join them.
I agree that it done wrongly there could be administrative problems with uploaded parts, but
That is what I liked about the CD-DB methodology whereas users can upvote/downvote parts.
As far as administration, I uploaded the part I modded, here: IRL640A Symbol Upload - #22 by BrendaEM
Now the administration begins–or the modded part withers on the vine.
@BrendaEM
I had a quick look at your modded part and it seems to comply with the KLC, however, the symbol you posted already exists in a Kicad library (see other post and above) so duplication is unnecessary.
I think the issue here is workflow.
For professionals the point is every part on a BOM must be specific. ( and specified )
Hence I’m a fan of anytime you modify a component no matter how trivial you create a custom library with that part correctly specified
That’s easy in Kicad as you can save a part into a custom library and then Edit it and correct the product designators. Nothing worse then quick fix on the drsign but the part specification refers to the old design.
If left on the forum, the part will certainly wither on the vine. In order to be considered for inclusion in the standard libraries it would need to be submitted to the library GitLab repository as described in the “Contribute” link that I provided, above. When the librarians finally get around to reviewing it they would either merge it in, request modifications, or reject it.
A lengthy post about halfway up this thread dated 28 Mar. and involving three screen grabs.
At the top of the second screen grab it shows the Kicad Global Library. The library name and symbol are:
Device:Q_NMOS_GDS[Read Only Library]-Symbol Editor
This post also shows the best way to work with Kicad.
Going further, an Cd-DB style thing so that users can upload, download, and rate parts
AUTORAX already showed how horrible this concept works in real life.
At the risk of repeating myself, please make the Footprint UI less daunting.
User-uploadable content, with ratings is in use not only for actual uses, not concepts, for CDDBs, which millions of people have used, and for Skins for many Media players, as well as Reaper DAW’s skins. The unpopular additions can drop from the bottom, the popular or high rated ones could be considered for inclusion.
I am sure that the makers of commercial circuit-design software, and their people here, would not like Kicad’s formats and system to become a standard.
I think this is a case of what we call here the aorta syndrome. As in Aorta pass a law against that, Aorta fix that bug, Aorta invent a solution.
KiCad is only the nucleus of a system. The they in aorta aren’t able to do everything. The rest has to be done by contributors, if at all. Even this forum is run by volunteers. What the developers can do is design a system that is extensible so that others can contribute.
3 Likes
I think your comment is a case of: the emperor’s clothes are fine; slay the person for point out their absence.
Except nobody is stopping you from filling an issue at Gitlab. Discussions here are just that.
I completely fail to comprehend the dauntyness.
From what I understand you take one of the standard MOSfet schematic symbols I think this one is a QNMOS_GDS (Where GDS is the pin order), and then combine it with a standard TO220 footprint. (Which always has pin orientation 123 from left to right when the tab is on the “back” and the pins point downward). You went astray in your very first post where you wanted to change the pin numbering of the TO220, while TO220 is a package with pretty standardized pin numbering (Don’t start about SOT23)
From one of your first posts:
Nope, the pin numbering of the TO220 package stays the same, no matter if it’s a FET, a Darlington, a LM317 or some other voltage regulator or IC. It’s the schematic symbol that gives meaning to the pin numbers.
Just as with all the DIP packages. The pin numbers are always in the same place, but according to their function you use other schematic symbols, and then put the pin numbers in the right place in the schematic.
Just for clarity (I hope) I’ve put all 6 standard Q_NMOS_xxx symbols in an overview:
2 Likes
Firstly, to reiterate, most of Kicad user interface is good.
(Other than this, I find myself only wanting a unlatched constrain key for the schematic editor, so I don’t make so may tilted lines and parallelograms. I don’t really like that we have any connected names in the bus, but that’s par for the course in these editors, and we cannot let Kicad have any advantage over any other. And lastly, perhaps let the PCB X(Trace) key be the same as the SCH W(ire) key. So, that’s 4 things in 120-150 hours us use. For an open-source program, that’s pretty good. I think that the plane fills are handled very well. The stackup and setup seem good. The auto backup and save seem to be working well, with lots of flexibility. Unlike the Audacity icon, the Kicad icon is findable on a launch bar. I was able to export Gerbers. For me, Kicad has been quite reliable and stable. Editing a symbol itself seemed doable, and if it gets complicated, it appears that there is .SVG support, so Inkscape could be used. But I prattle on because anyone who as a criticism of Kicad must be the enemy unless they have proven themselves, right?! ]
The problem I have described with library, part-import, part-export, user interface technically is a combination of a canonical and hierarchical problem. The relationship of the Kicad’s Libraries, Symbols, and Footprints is opaque.
Other people here were apparently not aware that the same part I was making might already exist in Kicad, which was not discoverable to me, either.
In places, are multiple yet differing ways into the same functionality.
Going further, a program such as Kicad will become entrenched if the part libraries are rich enough, and I am sure that scares the heck of the makers of commercial software, who likely have people somewhere in this forum.
Also, for as often as they are likely used, perhaps all the preferences should be on the same page. At least the Configure Paths could be on Preference menu.
Is there even a Spice Simulator icon, anywhere, in Kicad? Do you need me to try to make one?
If you go into preferences / hotkeys and double click on the appropriate hotkey, you can change it to whatever you wish.
While the key can be changed, an effort should be made to make the user interface uniform across its section. I am not a fan of change for change’s sake, but, making a coherent user interface is important.
[I remember a time before standardized graphical user interfaces, when a person could only learn how to run one program, such as a word processor or a spreadsheet. Now, most office workers are expected to know several office applications, and that would have only been possible by making the user interfaces uniform.
In the case of Blender, before it was open sourced, it was a commercial Amiga program. When the Amiga fell into it’s pre-retro computer status, the company who made Blender would not change the default mouse select button from the right, Amiga-style button. I suspect that, keeping the right mouse button as select–led to Blender’s failure as a commercial product. Yes, I also contributed a few Dollars to get it open sourced, during the drive.]
]
This topic was automatically closed 90 days after the last reply. New replies are no longer allowed.