List of Known Issues

[rbeyerCLBSZ]

Is there a list of known issues? Maybe we can start one that is continually updated as to the status and release fixes?

• General Interface
  • When there is an active tool/command, Fusion360 is unable to save a recovery file. 
  • The versioning system should be consistent across documents. If Autodesk's answer to save issues is "save from the design, not the schematic/board", then the save button should do exactly that. We shouldn't have a Design Version 52, Schematic Version 61, and a Board Version 39 all referencing the latest. If I want to look up Version 45, it should be Design 45, Schematic 45, and Board 45. 
• Libraries
  • Power_Supply library generates incorrect net names.
  • Resistor/Capacitor libraries generate incorrect component names (like U$1 instead of C1 or R1)
  • Resistor/Capacitor libraries do not have a "user definable value" when right-clicking and selecting "Value"
  • There is no easy way to open a library for editing without opening/creating a design. This makes it difficult to just create a library that isn't associated with any particular design.
• Schematics
  • Copy/Paste does not work
  • After drawing a bus, the bus tool does not remain active and it must be selected again to draw another bus

[jorge_garcia]

Hi @rbeyerCLBSZ,

I hope you're doing well. Thanks for this list.

I just wanted to make a comment about your second point. It entirely possible that the version numbers wouldn't match. For example imagine, you didn't start your board immediately when you started your schematic in that very common scenario the board would lag behind the schematic.

In regards to the 4th point under libraries , you can open a library without opening a design. For example you can go to the data panel and open a library directly from there. We'll work on the others.

Let me know if there's anything else I can do for you.

Best Regards,

[rbeyerCLBSZ]

Why can't the board design start at the same version as the schematic when you create the board? 

I've brought this up on a different forum here, but I think the issue is consistency. My customers will want to see the board revision match the schematic revision, otherwise there is no correlation between the two. How do I know that Schematic Version 8 refers to Board Version 5 and Design Version 7? 

I can see my customers being very confused over this (and I am). I think this is the difference between "Version" and "Revision". Revision I can see working how you are outlining, but version means something different. Does Autodesk release a new version for each fix/minor improvement, or a new revsion (aka minor version)? I think it would be OK if every save was a revision, but not a new version... If I want to make some functional change to my design, I want to call that "Version 2", and copy the files into a new project, not start over at Version 1...

[edwin.robledo]

Hi rbeyerCLBSZ,

---

@rbeyerCLBSZ wrote:

Why can't the board design start at the same version as the schematic when you create the board? 

I've brought this up on a different forum here, but I think the issue is consistency. My customers will want to see the board revision match the schematic revision, otherwise there is no correlation between the two. How do I know that Schematic Version 8 refers to Board Version 5 and Design Version 7? 

---

By running ERC on the board or schematic, you will be asserted that the board and schematic are consistent, which indicate they are linked. This can also be viewed in the electronic document:

I hope this helps.

Best Regards,

Edwin

---

---

[rbeyerCLBSZ]

That works fine if you are working in Fusion. But let's say I need to send a drawing packet to a customer, or Gerber files to a manufacturer. When the customer looks at the schematics and it says "Version 32" but then the board shows "Version 29" and I tell them that this is all "Version 31 (from the overall design file)", you don't see that as a problem?

When a customer calls up and tells me they want "Version 31 of this board" to be used as a replacement for existing equipment, how do I find that? What version are they referring to? The schematic version? The board version? The design version??

[ESCAPEKIT]

This is just a handful of the bugs currently present in Fusion, the list should be at least 20 times larger. I've been working full time with fusion 360 electronics for the last weeks and honestly, I just want to jump out the window and get done with it. 
I'm not even going to try and list all the bugs, they should have paid professional testers and tested the code BEFORE releasing it. This is not tolerable. This is not tolerable AT ALL. People rely on this software to make a living, you can't do this to us and expect us to be ok and just help you fix it.
And I agree, different versions is just plain useless. If I create the pcb from schematic version 25 I would like the pcb to be version 25 also. The versioning should be for the whole project, not for each file, it doesn't make any sense. At least this way if something was messed up I could revert to a previous version easily. Now if I want to revert I need to revert all files and hope they sync. They should always sync.

[kb9ydn]

---

@rbeyerCLBSZ wrote:

That works fine if you are working in Fusion. But let's say I need to send a drawing packet to a customer, or Gerber files to a manufacturer. When the customer looks at the schematics and it says "Version 32" but then the board shows "Version 29" and I tell them that this is all "Version 31 (from the overall design file)", you don't see that as a problem?

When a customer calls up and tells me they want "Version 31 of this board" to be used as a replacement for existing equipment, how do I find that? What version are they referring to? The schematic version? The board version? The design version??

---

The concerns raised here are valid, but I think the problem comes from using Fusion's internal file version(revision) number as an external "release version" number.  During development you might go though hundreds of file saves and therefor internal version numbers.  But upon the initial release of the product you would most likely call that "version 1.0", because it would be silly to call it "version 337".  Then any subsequent minor releases would be 1.1, 1.2, 1.3, and major releases 2.0, 3.0, etc..  The "release version" needs to be maintained separately from Fusion's internal file version numbers.

C|

[rbeyerCLBSZ]

Yes, however that adds even more confusion...

The title blocks automatically add the "Internal Version" number to the schematic name, so they end up looking like this (please note that the design is named "Schematic" in this case, I did not add the "v95"):

What you are proposing is to name it "Schematic V1", but then on all title blocks it shows up as "Schematic V1 v95". 

I just honestly don't think that the "internal version number" should be displayed at all, or keep them in sync between the files meaning that they should all be at the same version number, all the time. Even from an internal point of view, when trying to recover old work I'm not entirely sure (until I run DRC) that Schematic V95 refers to Board v86 and Design V91.

I think Autodesk is trying to shove the mechanical version system into the electronics design one and it just doesn't work. No other software works this way on the market. Even Eagle was fine in this regard! 

[kb9ydn]

---

@rbeyerCLBSZ wrote:

Yes, however that adds even more confusion...

The title blocks automatically add the "Internal Version" number to the schematic name, so they end up looking like this (please note that the design is named "Schematic" in this case, I did not add the "v95"):

What you are proposing is to name it "Schematic V1", but then on all title blocks it shows up as "Schematic V1 v95". 

I just honestly don't think that the "internal version number" should be displayed at all, or keep them in sync between the files meaning that they should all be at the same version number, all the time. Even from an internal point of view, when trying to recover old work I'm not entirely sure (until I run DRC) that Schematic V95 refers to Board v86 and Design V91.

I think Autodesk is trying to shove the mechanical version system into the electronics design one and it just doesn't work. No other software works this way on the market. Even Eagle was fine in this regard! 

---

No, it really shouldn't.  And it doesn't matter whether mechanical, electrical, software, or even technical documentation.  The internal versioning should be kept separate from release versioning.

Having Fusion's schematic version always match the board version doesn't make much sense.  Once you finish the schematic you could make numerous layout changes to the board with no change to the schematic.  Or maybe you don't start the board layout until version 82 of the schematic.  So what?  Even if they were synchronized, the file version numbers are still not very useful for situations where you might have to roll back to an earlier version.  For that it's best to add version notes when you save a file, to indicate that this particular version is special in some way.

I think what we're really getting to here is that Fusion in general just doesn't handle version control well.

C|