X-Authentication-Warning: delorie.com: mail set sender to geda-user-bounces using -f X-Recipient: geda-user AT delorie DOT com X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/ To: geda-user AT delorie DOT com From: Kai-Martin Knaak Subject: Re: [geda-user] [pcb] poll: burried/blind vias vs. pcb and pcb-rnd (How ?) Date: Thu, 28 Jan 2016 02:51:13 +0100 Lines: 13 Message-ID: References: <56A751EC DOT 8030402 AT iae DOT nl> <20160126124701 DOT 0d061912c7e078ced9d4e6cb AT gmail DOT com> <201601261804 DOT u0QI4KEQ009550 AT envy DOT delorie DOT com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7Bit X-Complaints-To: usenet AT ger DOT gmane DOT org X-Gmane-NNTP-Posting-Host: a89-182-157-238.net-htp.de User-Agent: KNode/4.14.10 Reply-To: geda-user AT delorie DOT com Britton Kerin wrote: > Extra layers are not that expensive and most boards that care about > density at all blind vias can make layout a lot easier even if they > aren't absolutely required. It seems like the major missing feature > in pcb to me, and a pretty good guess that people would use them if > they were available. > Count me in. I'd probably use blind vias in all of my four layer designs if they were readily available. However, I am certainly not ready to switch to a fork because of them. ---<)kaimartin(>---