 | | Re: We need an update NOW (Was: Parts Update?)
|
|
(...) Perhaps we could break the job into smaller chunks, like maybe 20 parts a week to relieve the pipeline pressure. -Chuck (23 years ago, 30-Apr-01, to lugnet.cad.dev, lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: We need an update NOW (Was: Parts Update?)
|
|
"Chuck Sommerville" <chucks@he.net> wrote in message news:GCMILA.AwH@lugnet.com... (...) I've been pushing for this inside for quite some time, with little response. Even splitting up the work for a big update among some of us who discuss LDraw.org (...) (23 years ago, 30-Apr-01, to lugnet.cad.dev, lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: We need an update NOW (Was: Parts Update?)
|
|
(...) I'm not understanding here. The parts are available in file form in a some cluster in some repository somewhere, yes? Publishing them, even in an unofficial process, would simply consist of putting them on a server. There would be little-to-no (...) (23 years ago, 30-Apr-01, to lugnet.cad.dev, lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: We need an update NOW (Was: Parts Update?)
|
|
"Tim Courtney" <tim@zacktron.com> wrote in message news:GCMIxI.BvL@lugnet.com... (...) this (...) Just sent another email to a few people about this. I hope there'll be some progress. -Tim (23 years ago, 30-Apr-01, to lugnet.cad.dev, lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: We need an update NOW (Was: Parts Update?)
|
|
"Sproaticus" <jsproat@io.com> wrote in message news:GCMJot.E07@lugnet.com... (...) this (...) Kinda unrelated statement, I intended it to reflect more the project as a whole. I think (and I accept that this will never be the case) that the whole (...) (23 years ago, 30-Apr-01, to lugnet.cad.dev, lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: We need an update NOW (Was: Parts Update?)
|
|
(...) This isn't really a matter of patience; it's been far too long than it needs to be. We need a better system. In the mean-time, the factors contributing to the delay can be addressed, and quickly. e.g. What are the factors holding back the (...) (23 years ago, 30-Apr-01, to lugnet.cad.dev, lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: We need an update NOW (Was: Parts Update?)
|
|
I've been playing with ldraw and all it's wonderful part for only a short time now. What I don't understand in this discussion is what is the difference in an 'offical' vs 'unoffical' part. Apart from whewre I can download offical part what is (...) (23 years ago, 30-Apr-01, to lugnet.cad.dev, lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: We need an update NOW (Was: Parts Update?)
|
|
(...) It seems to me that LDraw has become a project of secrecy and inside work. When did it stop being an "open" project? When did discussions concerning LDraw cease to be done in the open? I think I missed this. I realize that whoever work with (...) (23 years ago, 1-May-01, to lugnet.cad.dev, lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: We need an update NOW (Was: Parts Update?)
|
|
"Fredrik Glöckner" <fredrik.glockner@bio.uio.no> wrote in message news:qrd1yq98itn.fsf....uio.no... (...) Its not a matter of hiding the work, see below. (...) This is the case. Newsgroup discussions get noisy - people tend to have long drawn out (...) (23 years ago, 1-May-01, to lugnet.cad.dev, lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: We need an update NOW (Was: Parts Update?)
|
|
(...) Thank you Fredrik, for so succinctly expressing what I was feeling. I was building up a lot of frustration because I felt I had to make a loud noise in order to be heard. (...) I think the discussions should still be in the open. No consensus (...) (23 years ago, 1-May-01, to lugnet.cad.dev, lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: We need an update NOW (Was: Parts Update?)
|
|
HeeHeee! I have great faith in Tim that one day LDraw will become an open project, but I don't think it has ever been one in the past! :) As soon as the parts library is opened up, I promise I'll check it all into Sourceforge.org, so one can use (...) (23 years ago, 2-May-01, to lugnet.cad.dev, lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: We need an update NOW (Was: Parts Update?)
|
|
(...) This sounds almost like communistic ideology: For the project to ultimately become open, it must first become more closed for a while! ;-) (...) That's undoubtedly an interesting idea. Fredrik (23 years ago, 2-May-01, to lugnet.cad.dev, lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: We need an update NOW (Was: Parts Update?)
|
|
(...) Paul, I don't know if you saw earlier messages about the Part Tracker, but there was some discussion about whether or not we could use CVS as a backend to an automated system. What do you think? There are a number of features we need that (I (...) (23 years ago, 2-May-01, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: We need an update NOW (Was: Parts Update?)
|
|
(...) I'll go look up the discussion. I'm just getting back into the swing of things. I think CVS would be a great way of distributing the parts. There's clearly some managment tools needed to help with organizing the submissions and reviews of new (...) (23 years ago, 3-May-01, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: We need an update NOW (Was: Parts Update?)
|
|
(...) I think a small script running "l3p -check" called from within the CVS commitinfo file would work great for this. (...) (23 years ago, 3-May-01, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
