 | | | | | |
In lugnet.announce, Chris Dee wrote:
> The 2005-01 LDraw parts update has been now been released.
woo-hoo!
Thanks for putting this update together, Chris!
> Although we started the process of implementing the LDraw Contributor Agreement
> (CA) at the start of 2005, no decision has been made on how to organise the
> existing parts library to split the parts covered by the CA from those created
> by authors who have failed to respond to our many attempts to contact them in
> this regard.
Just to be painfully clear on this point, does the update include/exclude non-CA
files? Or did you ignore CA-ness completely?
Steve
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
In lugnet.cad, Steve Bliss wrote:
> In lugnet.announce, Chris Dee wrote:
> > The 2005-01 LDraw parts update has been now been released.
>
> woo-hoo!
>
> Thanks for putting this update together, Chris!
>
> > Although we started the process of implementing the LDraw Contributor Agreement
> > (CA) at the start of 2005, no decision has been made on how to organise the
> > existing parts library to split the parts covered by the CA from those created
> > by authors who have failed to respond to our many attempts to contact them in
> > this regard.
>
> Just to be painfully clear on this point, does the update include/exclude non-CA
> files? Or did you ignore CA-ness completely?
>
> Steve
I ignored CA-ness completely and there are definitely parts in this update from
authors who have not affirmed the CA - just like there are in the rest of the
official library. There seemed little point holding those back until we divide
the whole library.
Chris
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| |
|
In lugnet.cad, Chris Dee wrote:
> In lugnet.cad, Steve Bliss wrote:
> > In lugnet.announce, Chris Dee wrote:
> > > The 2005-01 LDraw parts update has been now been released.
> >
> > woo-hoo!
> >
> > Thanks for putting this update together, Chris!
> >
> > > Although we started the process of implementing the LDraw Contributor Agreement
> > > (CA) at the start of 2005, no decision has been made on how to organise the
> > > existing parts library to split the parts covered by the CA from those created
> > > by authors who have failed to respond to our many attempts to contact them in
> > > this regard.
> >
> > Just to be painfully clear on this point, does the update include/exclude non-CA
> > files? Or did you ignore CA-ness completely?
> >
> > Steve
>
> I ignored CA-ness completely and there are definitely parts in this update from
> authors who have not affirmed the CA - just like there are in the rest of the
> official library. There seemed little point holding those back until we divide
> the whole library.
>
> Chris
could the SteerCo please pronounce about the direction it will take on this
topic? is there an author who did explicitly disagree to the CA or are we just
talk about people you couldn't trace back? I for example tried to contact
Steffen and Ronald Scott Moody several times but never got reply. IMHO some
legal advice how ldraw.org should act in this case would be helpful.
BTW there is still Peter Watts on the list of authors who have not yet affirmed
the CA:
http://www.ldraw.org/modules.php?op=modload&name=News&file=article&sid=356
but I know for sure that he has agreed in July after I had contacted him through
fbtb.net. is the list up to date?
bye, w.
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| |
|
In lugnet.cad, Willy Tschager wrote:
> In lugnet.cad, Chris Dee wrote:
> > In lugnet.cad, Steve Bliss wrote:
> > > In lugnet.announce, Chris Dee wrote:
> > > > The 2005-01 LDraw parts update has been now been released.
> > >
> > > woo-hoo!
> > >
> > > Thanks for putting this update together, Chris!
> > >
> > > > Although we started the process of implementing the LDraw Contributor Agreement
> > > > (CA) at the start of 2005, no decision has been made on how to organise the
> > > > existing parts library to split the parts covered by the CA from those created
> > > > by authors who have failed to respond to our many attempts to contact them in
> > > > this regard.
> > >
> > > Just to be painfully clear on this point, does the update include/exclude non-CA
> > > files? Or did you ignore CA-ness completely?
> > >
> > > Steve
> >
> > I ignored CA-ness completely and there are definitely parts in this update from
> > authors who have not affirmed the CA - just like there are in the rest of the
> > official library. There seemed little point holding those back until we divide
> > the whole library.
> >
> > Chris
>
>
> could the SteerCo please pronounce about the direction it will take on this
> topic? is there an author who did explicitly disagree to the CA or are we just
> talk about people you couldn't trace back? I for example tried to contact
> Steffen and Ronald Scott Moody several times but never got reply. IMHO some
> legal advice how ldraw.org should act in this case would be helpful.
>
> BTW there is still Peter Watts on the list of authors who have not yet affirmed
> the CA:
>
> http://www.ldraw.org/modules.php?op=modload&name=News&file=article&sid=356
>
> but I know for sure that he has agreed in July after I had contacted him through
> fbtb.net. is the list up to date?
>
> bye, w.
No explicit disagrements as far as I know, just non-responders.
Peter Watts (FrozenPea) has not sent an affirmation to the address on the Parts
Tracker home page.
I am taking the wider question up with the rest of the SteerCo.
Chris
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| |
|
In lugnet.cad, Chris Dee wrote:
> In lugnet.cad, Willy Tschager wrote:
> > In lugnet.cad, Chris Dee wrote:
[snip-snap]
> > could the SteerCo please pronounce about the direction it will take on this
> > topic? is there an author who did explicitly disagree to the CA or are we just
> > talk about people you couldn't trace back? I for example tried to contact
> > Steffen and Ronald Scott Moody several times but never got reply. IMHO some
> > legal advice how ldraw.org should act in this case would be helpful.
> >
> > BTW there is still Peter Watts on the list of authors who have not yet affirmed
> > the CA:
> >
> > http://www.ldraw.org/modules.php?op=modload&name=News&file=article&sid=356
> >
> > but I know for sure that he has agreed in July after I had contacted him through
> > fbtb.net. is the list up to date?
> >
> > bye, w.
>
> No explicit disagrements as far as I know, just non-responders.
>
> Peter Watts (FrozenPea) has not sent an affirmation to the address on the Parts
> Tracker home page.
please check back with orion. may be he has sent the affirmation to his privat
email 'cos I told peter to contact orion if he had any questions.
> I am taking the wider question up with the rest of the SteerCo.
many thx
> Chris
w.
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
In lugnet.cad, Willy Tschager wrote:
> please check back with orion. may be he has sent the affirmation to his privat
> email 'cos I told peter to contact orion if he had any questions.
I got it but I didn't update the list on LDraw.org.
-Orion
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
In lugnet.cad, Orion Pobursky wrote:
> In lugnet.cad, Willy Tschager wrote:
> > please check back with orion. may be he has sent the affirmation to his privat
> > email 'cos I told peter to contact orion if he had any questions.
>
> I got it but I didn't update the list on LDraw.org.
>
> -Orion
It has been updated now, and he has been given PT Submit privileges.
Chris
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
> > could the SteerCo please pronounce about the direction it will take on this
> > topic? is there an author who did explicitly disagree to the CA or are we just
> > talk about people you couldn't trace back?
>
> No explicit disagrements as far as I know, just non-responders.
Roughly how many parts does this list cover?
Can most of them be (easily) recreated?
--
Dean Earley, Dee (dean@earlsoft.co.uk)
irc: irc://irc.blitzed.org/
web: http://personal.earlsoft.co.uk
phone: +44 (0)780 8369596
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
In lugnet.cad, Dean Earley wrote:
> > > could the SteerCo please pronounce about the direction it will take on this
> > > topic? is there an author who did explicitly disagree to the CA or are we just
> > > talk about people you couldn't trace back?
> >
> > No explicit disagrements as far as I know, just non-responders.
>
> Roughly how many parts does this list cover?
We're still sorting it out.
> Can most of them be (easily) recreated?
I think some yes, some no.
Steve
| | | | | | |
