To LUGNET HomepageTo LUGNET News HomepageTo LUGNET Guide Homepage
 Help on Searching
 
Post new message to lugnet.cadOpen lugnet.cad in your NNTP NewsreaderTo LUGNET News Traffic PageSign In (Members)
 CAD / 17097
17096  |  17098
Subject: 
Re: The future of LDraw?
Newsgroups: 
lugnet.cad
Date: 
Sun, 21 Mar 2010 21:10:21 GMT
Viewed: 
21366 times
  
In lugnet.cad, Joshua Delahunty wrote:
This brings up another point that hasn't entirely been part of the discussion:
the concept of self-helped individuals versus end users.  A lot of people early
on (by necessity) were quite willing to climb the mountain to get LDRAW set up.
They don't mind a little tinkering and manual labor to get things into place,
and to tweak and tinker along the way to keep things updated.

The project has since moved into a new phase where there are plenty of end users
of the products.  They don't like or want (and shouldn't need) to worry about
the nuts and bolts, they just want to use cool software.

When you get to that point, you "lock in" a certain set of requirements, and
those requirements dictate rigor and attention, in order to provide consistency
and clarity.

Long gone are the days that an author can "play" with a part, changing the
origin or default posing on a whim. There are a host of issues that go along
with that.  So a lot of the growth of "committees" and voting and the cost of
entry are due to those factors as well.  The library has a host of annoying
errors (such as pairs of parts that have the wrong part numbers, but have to
stay that way for backward compatibility) that are really locked in, because of
that issue.  In a way, the project is a bit of a victim of its own success.

It's because of all those issues that part authors and reviewers are much more
careful to "get it right" the first time, so we don't get stuck with designs or
situations that are lacking.

The whole "rewrite every header by hand" job that Chris had to do certainly
didn't help the situation, of course.  It really HAD to happen, though.

     -- joshuaD

That's a really good explanation of why the 'rules and regulations' have grown
alongside the part library and software.

Tim



Message is in Reply To:
  Re: The future of LDraw?
 
(...) I wanted to make sure people weren't turned away from LeoCAD because they might think they'd be dependent on third parties to provide a parts library, that's just not true, so people SHOULD check it out. It's certainly my LCAD tool of choice (...) (14 years ago, 21-Mar-10, to lugnet.cad)

105 Messages in This Thread:
(Inline display suppressed due to large size. Click Dots below to view.)
Entire Thread on One Page:
Nested:  All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:  All | Brief | Compact
    

Custom Search

©2005 LUGNET. All rights reserved. - hosted by steinbruch.info GbR