This gets filed under "things said by people who haven't seen what'd be necessary to implement that" ;)
On Sun, Apr 10, 2016 at 10:23:22AM +0200, easyw wrote: > I think there should be an option to export a new board version to previous > version, eventually warning on what could be lost if the file contains some > new features... > that is a standard feature in most sw, to allow a better collaborative > environment > Maurice > > > On 10/04/2016 02.49, Chris Pavlina wrote: > >Possible to implement, of course, but that could get rather messy as the > >parser > >has to be taught to ignore things it doesn't recognize, which is not exactly > >easy given the context-sensitive nature of our kinda-sorta-pseudo-parser > >implementation... > > > >I don't see the problem with refusing. It ensures that even subtle changes > >(like when we changed the anchor point for multiline texts) don't cause > >trouble. It's forward, not backward - it's not like it'll ever prevent people > >from opening old boards in new versions, it just means they might have to > >upgrade to open new ones. > > > >On Sat, Apr 09, 2016 at 08:00:11PM -0400, Wayne Stambaugh wrote: > >>Chris, > >> > >>I looked at this patch and I thought you were going to add a check to > >>warn the user that the board file may not load. Your patch will refuse > >>to load any previous versions even if the file does not contain any new > >>features. I'm not sure flat out rejecting newer board versions is a > >>good idea. I would rather warn the user that it might fail to load and > >>than fail if there is anything that the parser can't handle. If there > >>are no new features in the file, then it should open as expected. > >> > >>Wayne > >> > >>On 4/9/2016 11:42 AM, Chris Pavlina wrote: > >>>Here's a patch that checks the PCB file format version against the > >>>currently > >>>supported one, and displays a message explaining the situation if the PCB > >>>file > >>>is too recent. I assumed YYYYMMDD format for the version. Message looks > >>>like > >>>this: > >>> > >>> KiCad was unable to open this file, as it was created with a more > >>> recent > >>> version than the one you are running. To open it, you'll need to > >>> upgrade > >>> KiCad to a more recent version. > >>> > >>> File: <filename> > >>> Date of KiCad version required (or newer): <format version, > >>> reformatted as date in locale> > >>> > >>>A couple changes still have to be made - this is only for comment, not to > >>>commit. > >>> > >>>1. Also check footprints - we'll have to add versioning to those, as it's > >>>not > >>> there at all right now as JP said. > >>>2. Use a more friendly error dialog without the "IO_ERROR" and source code > >>> location, at least in non-debug builds. That will frighten people. :) > >>> > >>>On Thu, Apr 07, 2016 at 09:47:41AM -0400, Chris Pavlina wrote: > >>>>Hi all, > >>>> > >>>>I'm targeting this email primarily at Wayne as versioning and release > >>>>policy is > >>>>involved. > >>>> > >>>>We've got a bit of a problem right now. We're currently adding features > >>>>to the > >>>>pcbnew format - JP just merged rounded-rect pads and has a patch in > >>>>development > >>>>for custom pads, and I'm looking at a patch to add angled fields. Problem > >>>>is: > >>>> > >>>>1. We're not bumping the file format version, so even though we're writing > >>>>files that contain features (actual COPPER features!) that old versions > >>>>won't > >>>>understand, we're not marking them as such, so they'll either give nasty > >>>>file-corrupted errors, or fail to load silently. > >>>> > >>>>2. Even if we did, pcbnew currently ignores the format version. > >>>> > >>>> > >>>>I propose the following: > >>>> > >>>>1. Patch pcbnew to check the format version and give a friendly "your > >>>>KiCad may > >>>>be out of date"-style warning if it's too high a number. > >>>> > >>>>2. Accelerate this patch to a minor stable release to get it out there > >>>>before > >>>>these new features make it into the next major release. > >>>> > >>>>3. Adopt a policy of properly bumping the version number any time a > >>>>feature is > >>>>added. > >>>> > >>>>Thoughts? > >>>> > >>>>-- Chris > >>>> > >>>> > >>>>_______________________________________________ > >>>>Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers > >>>>Post to : kicad-developers@lists.launchpad.net > >>>>Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers > >>>>More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp > >> > >> > >>_______________________________________________ > >>Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers > >>Post to : kicad-developers@lists.launchpad.net > >>Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers > >>More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp > > > >_______________________________________________ > >Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers > >Post to : kicad-developers@lists.launchpad.net > >Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers > >More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp > > > > _______________________________________________ > Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers > Post to : kicad-developers@lists.launchpad.net > Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers > More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp _______________________________________________ Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers Post to : kicad-developers@lists.launchpad.net Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
