Comment 18 for bug 1843993

@Seth
I know that my suggestion is to change internal assumptions. I suggest pads with the same number need not be connected but you can connect them if you wont. I have nothing against specifying that different way but using for it just the same number seams for me the simplest and most logical way.
At that moment I can't imagine any footprint to have two pads with the same number and needing them to be connected at PCB but I know only limited set of footprints I have used in past. Do such footprints can't have that pads with different numbers and symbol with separate pins? Example with info why pads have to have the same number please.
The suggestion of potential problems with netlist testing at the fab house is very surprising for me. Since over 30 years we have never send a schematic to PCB manufacturer. So the only netlist they can get comes from gerber files so if net is connected to only one pad of two (part with internal connection) they just see that this net should be connected to only that one pad and the other one is not connected. Since ± 15 years our PCB manufacturer claims he electrically tests 100% of his PCBs - so he has to base on gerbers and not other sources.
Forget my multipad connection problem (in Q-Touch key). It is only a source of this bug report. I suppose it is solved (I will see when I will install 5.1.5) - as I remember offset in SMD pads were not taken into account to detect pads are connected (if offsetted center is inside another pad) and as I remember (not sure) it was fixed.
The only reason for me to discuss it now is to make KiCad better.