Subject:
|
Do we need public part submission information ?
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.cad
|
Followup-To:
|
lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw
|
Date:
|
Wed, 25 Oct 2000 19:19:53 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
623 times
|
| |
|
|
Hello all,
I've posted this message to the group CAD/Development/Organizations/LDraw
before, but got no response there. I try it a bit higher in the hierargy,
but set the follow-up back to cad.dev.org.ldraw, agreed ?
I think we should put up a resource with some submission info somewhere.
I suspect some part authors only post on Lugnet and/or the Parts Tracker and
don't submit their part because they don't know they should do so.
What about something similar to this:
1- Where to submit finished part for voting:
partsref@home.com
This is a special adress to submit dat-files, once you're convinced it's good
enought to withstand democratic forces. Also, this is the -only- place where
you can enter your dat-files to the voting process that might result in its
release as an official part.
It's generaly a good idea to ask for a second opinion on your part before you
submit. The Lugnet discussion group cad.dat.parts is ideal for this purpose.
see http://news.lugnet.com/cad/dat/parts/
Please remember we don't scan for possible new canidates on Lugnet. After
you've incorporated the remarks recieved there, you still have to submit your
part personally at the given E-mail adress.
2- Format of the obligatory part header:
0 <part description>
0 <part number>.dat
0 <Author>
0 Un-Official Element
Replace any <...> with the appropriate information. The length of the first
line, with the part description, may not exceed 64 characters, the 0 and the
space in front included. The fourth line should always be as stated, to
indicate that the part hasn't been officialised yet. When the part gets
included in a official update, the update manager will use this line to show
release information.
3- Terminate the file with a singe line only containing a 0 (zero) and no
linefeed.
Editorial notes:
Is 64 characters correct ?
Why point 3: it just seems logical to me (no, I don't have pointed ears :-),
to standardise this bit also.
And perhaps some minimum required quality standards added, although I
personally would not know what to say there.
Greetings, M. Moolhuysen.
|
|
Message has 2 Replies:
8 Messages in This Thread:
   
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
