Re: gEDA-user: next PCB release - 1.99za vs 4.0

[Bob Paddock <bob.paddock@xxxxxxxxx>]

   On Sat, Sep 11, 2010 at 7:55 PM, John Griessen <[1]john@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
   wrote:

   On 09/11/2010 06:39 PM, Bob Paddock wrote:

        Yes, the 'keep-out' should be per layer.  In Protel it blocks all
        layers which is frequently what you do not want.

     Are you sure?

   Yes.  Consider that you have a surface mount battery connector with
   springy tabs.  The 'springs' are meant to compress to battery
   terminals.
   You need to 'keep-out' anything under and around the springs.
   As this is a surface mount part, using a 'keep-out' global layer now
   prevents traces from being routed on any layer at all.

      A per layer keep-out doesn't let you automate routing.
     a per layer-group keep-out would allow more automation, where the
     autorouter
     has a layer group to route a net in.

   How about a keep-out layer with a layer enable list?  "This keep-out
   applies to layers 1,2,4,7,8", and a "This keep-out applies to all
   layers".
   Realistically I've wanted to 'keep-out' Top Layer, Bottom Layer, or All
   Layers in almost all cases.

   --
   [2]http://blog.softwaresafety.net/
   [3]http://www.designer-iii.com/
   [4]http://www.wearablesmartsensors.com/

References

   1. mailto:john@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
   2. http://blog.softwaresafety.net/
   3. http://www.designer-iii.com/
   4. http://www.wearablesmartsensors.com/


_______________________________________________
geda-user mailing list
geda-user@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://www.seul.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/geda-user