This looks nice, and I want one. 
Hopefully it can become the BLF standard.
For that to happen someone will need to make drivers that use it.
I just ordered three of his SRK v3.5 boards, so its likely he adds the key and releases v3.6 soon.
This is a good step forward for moving to a more powerful mcu with more pins, now there is a way to program it.
For anything with more pins, a programming key is going to be required anyway. And people keep wanting to add more power channels, more aux LED channels, fancier designs, more switches, etcā¦ so more pins will be necessary soon. Something like tiny841 or tiny1634 or maybe even tiny1616 whenever the toolchain catches up to the latest chips.
For SOIC8 designs, a programming key is nice to have but not actually requiredā¦ However, itāll actually be necessary pretty soon. Weāll probably be switching to QFN-20 chips before long. Maybe even VQFN-20.
On my workbench already. My SRK is one light where I want this key for, really really soon.
Oh, I like this key even for SOIC8 designs very much. But Iād be glad if it helps developing new designs, better drivers and fancier firmware. Thatād be even more than I could wish for.
About the pogo pins:
I used the P50-B1 version with 0.5mm pin diameter and 0.68mm sheath diameter. They fit perfectly for the 1.5mm spacing between the top and bottom vias/pads (0.8mm pcb + 2x 0.34mm 
).
I bought 2 P75 versions as well, just in case Iād deem the P50 too flimsy. The P75 are wider and would obviously need more space. And although they are a bit stronger, I for now believe the P50 will work just fine. Iād prefer not to make the footprint on the driver even wider.
I tried the P50-B1 pin in 0.5mm vias and they tend to go through. Not all at once, but one or two of four. Iām not convinced the contact is as well as when the pins sit tight on top of a via, Iād prefer the latter. So Iāll stick with 0.4mm or 16mil vias in the driver board design.
This looks great HarleyQuin.
For detailed technical information about the pins, and suitability, you could contact https://www.peaktest.co.uk who Iām sure would suggest something suitable.
This is actually very mature technology, nice to see it being applied to torch drivers. I think that I suggested it first, but I also think plenty of others also had the same idea simultaneously. Been going on elsewhere for years.
As TK says, it has to happen, once we move on from the 8 pin MCUs.
I see Microchip Technology stock is on a wild ride at the moment. Lets hope it resolves, because since the PIC and Atmel lines were merged, where else can we go ? Itās either a good monopoly, or a failing one.
Serious question. These things, almost literally, make the world go around. Except for the ARM RISC that utterly dominates (and we allowed to be sold off for silly money).
Sophie Wilson (born Roger) is/was a genius.
Nice. Iām also in favor of compatible programming pads/vias being added to new BLF driver designs going forward. But I donāt want hardware development here to become a monoculture. We have some guys working on diverse designs, and Iād like to keep it that way. So, Iām of two minds on āstandardizationā efforts. Hopefully a nice balance is kept between the āusualā and the āunusualā here.
Excellent. Iāll probably order the new ones and the key at a later date.
I was only planning on using one of the v3.5 boards in the near future anyway.
Any updates? I like the 4+2 design. I would like to add it to my Q8 driver.
This ProgKey looks much better than the one from Lexel.
But I would also like to be sure which standard is most promising.
I wouldnāt say itās better, itās just different.
If itās coming to standards, Iām the wrong guy to ask. Iām one of the open source guys here, I donāt and wonāt sell anything. I just share what I have if deemed interesting and I got the time. And the open source fraction usually doesnāt set the standards. 
I just liked the idea that Lexel brought to the forum, instantly knew I will adopt it for my boards, and wanted to advance it by showing where a more universal approach might be preferable. Iād love it if others would come up with more thoughts and ideas.
If not, the commercial product will get released as deemed fit, the open source guys will make their own stuff and those who can only buy will have to buy whatās on the table. Thatās of course a way to set a standard. Sounds familiar? Probably is.
HarleyQuin
Can you please state at the beginning of your post if your programming key is kompatibel with Lexcels?
I can replug the leads, but is spacing the same?
I read the other thread a while ago and forgot the details.
Same spacing as Lexelās: 1.3mm sideways and 1.5mm up and down.
The second post is reserved for drawings of spacing and examples for usage in board design, I just couldnāt find the time to upload it, yet.
Thank you!
Do you see a chance that these things fit?
Same pogo pin pitch, but different in the two rows.
I guess a manufacturer would use these as adapter.
Interesting
You mean this double row version:
They stick to a 1.27mm spacing in all directions
Would save the time of making they key, although these āspring loaded connectorsā look really really small. Some kind of āhandleā would be needed anyway.
Any link to the real life product? Can they be bought in low quantities?
Just googled spring loaded connectors, looks promising, but canāt dig deeper atm.
For now our 1.5mm upper/lower spacing on the key comes from the 0.8mm pcb and half the diameter of the pogo pin. Bringing it down to the same 1.27/1.3mm would not be bad.
On the other hand a 1.27mm version might just fit our 1.5mm spacing. But the risk of malflashing increases.
Iām not that fond of pads after having tested on a board here, with 6 vias on the board the connection is way better.
Nice to see this. Iām using 0.85mm vias for my acupuncture style flashing. Switching to smaller vias and using pogo pins would save me some space. I donāt like holding pins in place though, you said 0.5mm vias sometimes lets the pins through? Is just that because the pins are fixed on your key or does the actual size vary sometimes?
Yes, the double row ones.
No I havenāt seen them as single item, only this kind with magnets in consumer products.
Because they are rated 100 000 connections a manufacturer can do a rig to flash all drivers.
I donāt know how durable the normal pogo pins are.
I was wondering if the vias have a bit more of a pad around they will work too.
Could be asymmetrical or symmetric
Kinda this way:
( 0)(0) ( 0)(0 )
( 0)(0) ( 0)(0 )
( 0)(0) ( 0)(0 )
( 0)(0) ( 0)(0 )
Added graphics for spacing, pin layout and naming in the second post.
.
@joechina
Iād see these connectors as a kind of next evolutionary step when they are readily available. But then Iād migrate to 6 vias in the appropriate spacing.
.
@MikeC
I had seen your version and at that time it needed too much space for me to implement it in the one driver where I badly would have needed it.
The pogo pins: nothing wrong with them, the ones we use (the smallest ones of the bunch at BG/FT) have a rod-diameter of 0.48mm by design. I tested pushing them through 0.5mm vias and they mostly went through. I find it better when the pointy tip of the rod sits tight on the via, not in it, so the via should be smaller, like 0.4mm or 16mil.
In that case, the connection is really really good. Thatās why I prefer to use 6 vias instead of a combo of vias and pads. The rod canāt escape the via to the side, does not slide through it, the springs of the pogo pins ensure some pressure and good contact even when you shake a bit.
I was truly impressed when I tried this combination.
So maybe Iāll try 0.55mm vias so they can go through every time. I agree that if you just want to flash a driver then holding is the easiest solution but I do too much flashing, testing, development and flashing again for that to be reasonable. I wanna stickāem in one by one and leave them there until Iām done.
I think a few hints about vias on pads in the application notes would be good.
It tends to wick away solder.
Also solder stop for a via direct connected to a pad.