Some of my EP sizes might be wrong (again)

[poeschlr]

I used the datasheet suggested ep size instead of the nominal "slug" size when the datasheet suggested one. i however noticed that i even did that when the datasheet suggested EP size was for a maximum or minimum size. I would say that this might be a bit wrong as our footprints represent nominal sizes.

This means all footprint definitions with EP_size_x_overwrite (and EP_size_y_overwrite) parameters must be double checked. (This will however not be done by 5.1.)
In a lot of these cases i decided this way to avoid needing to change the symbol.

The most likely canditates for problems are footprints with microchip packages. (Most other manufacturers only suggest nominal sizes in their datasheet not extreme values.)

Edit: Luckily only about 30 or so footprints even define an overwrite (A final count can only be given after my recent additions are all merged.)