English is currently available.
Engineers Gossips DISCUSSION
KiCad has published a 10.0.7 release candidate while 10.0.6 is available as a stable release. How should a team decide whether to test a new build during an active board project?
Assume the current tool has a routing problem that might be fixed, but manufacturing files are due soon. What would you compare before accepting a tool update, and what should be archived so the design remains reproducible?
Reference: KiCad release announcements (https://www.kicad.org/blog/).
Test on a separate copy or version-control branch first. Preserve the original project, project libraries and current manufacturing outputs. A release candidate is a testing build, so do not make it the only environment capable of opening the active design. Check the relevant change notes and reproduce the specific routing problem before assuming the new build fixes it.
Compare results that matter to manufacturing: DRC findings, copper and mask layers, drill sizes, plated versus non-plated holes, board outline and component positions. A screenshot of the editor is insufficient. Open newly generated Gerbers and drill files independently, preferably overlaid with the previous export, and investigate every unexpected difference rather than accepting a clean DRC as proof of equivalence.
Archive the tool version, libraries, export settings and the exact files sent to fabrication. If the update only addresses an unrelated issue, postponing it until the next revision may be reasonable. If it fixes a blocking defect, record the minimal test demonstrating the fix and the checks that still pass. The decision should depend on the defect and release risk, not simply on a newer version number.
Back to Engineers Gossips community
