| |
In lugnet.cad.dev, Tim Courtney wrote:
> "Chris Dee" <chris_w_dee@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:GCnMwn.Axw@lugnet.com...
> > In lugnet.cad.dev, Fredrik Glöckner writes:
> > > "Sproaticus" <jsproat@io.com> writes:
> > >
> > > > Give me unofficial parts, I don't care.
> > >
> > > I don't think that unofficial parts should be published from LDraw.
> >
> >
> > Agree - unofficial means they may change - and if the change is to the origin
> > or orientation then users will get (even more) upset.
>
> Disagree.
I think Chris is right. It will be challenging to disclaim an unofficial
update in a way that nobody will get upset later. When we do officialize
the pieces, there will be orientation changes, and different part numbers
with no forwarding addresses. Models built on unofficial parts are likely
to break.
There's also the issue of being able to later clean up the pollution from
an unofficial update. It would be easy to enough for people to use their
Windows Find to locate files containing the word 'unofficial', and delete
those files, but that would imply that we reviewed all the files before
releasing them, to make sure they all have the "unofficial element" line.
And reviewing all the files before an official release is something we're
trying to avoid, right?
Steve
|
|
| |
HMM a minor idea. group all Unofficial parts in "Unofficial" group like
"brick" and "plate" type of group.
--
And they said 'Computers will never be in general use'
"Steve Bliss" <steve.bliss@home.com> wrote in message
news:p61uetc27fg7opir90ti5ea3skc73ec63o@4ax.com...
> In lugnet.cad.dev, Tim Courtney wrote:
>
> > "Chris Dee" <chris_w_dee@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> > news:GCnMwn.Axw@lugnet.com...
> > > In lugnet.cad.dev, Fredrik Glöckner writes:
> > > > "Sproaticus" <jsproat@io.com> writes:
> > > >
> > > > > Give me unofficial parts, I don't care.
> > > >
> > > > I don't think that unofficial parts should be published from LDraw.
> > >
> > >
> > > Agree - unofficial means they may change - and if the change is to the • origin
> > > or orientation then users will get (even more) upset.
> >
> > Disagree.
>
> I think Chris is right. It will be challenging to disclaim an unofficial
> update in a way that nobody will get upset later. When we do officialize
> the pieces, there will be orientation changes, and different part numbers
> with no forwarding addresses. Models built on unofficial parts are likely
> to break.
>
> There's also the issue of being able to later clean up the pollution from
> an unofficial update. It would be easy to enough for people to use their
> Windows Find to locate files containing the word 'unofficial', and delete
> those files, but that would imply that we reviewed all the files before
> releasing them, to make sure they all have the "unofficial element" line.
> And reviewing all the files before an official release is something we're
> trying to avoid, right?
>
> Steve
|
|
| |
"Steve Bliss" <steve.bliss@home.com> wrote in message
news:p61uetc27fg7opir90ti5ea3skc73ec63o@4ax.com...
> I think Chris is right. It will be challenging to disclaim an unofficial
> update in a way that nobody will get upset later. When we do officialize
> the pieces, there will be orientation changes, and different part numbers
> with no forwarding addresses. Models built on unofficial parts are likely
> to break.
>
> There's also the issue of being able to later clean up the pollution from
> an unofficial update. It would be easy to enough for people to use their
> Windows Find to locate files containing the word 'unofficial', and delete
> those files, but that would imply that we reviewed all the files before
> releasing them, to make sure they all have the "unofficial element" line.
> And reviewing all the files before an official release is something we're
> trying to avoid, right?
I think I see it now. As far as broken models go, we don't want that. I have
had a couple of those, and that's frustrating.
I got your message in this group about the news item, I'm working on that right
now. I think it might be good to make an official statement about the parts on
the site as well - so what exactly will we do?
You wrote in another message:
> I think I can use my part-voting-preparation utilities to generate a
> webpage like the ones we use for voting. So people could check out what
> the unofficial parts are, and either download them all in one shot, or just
> grab what they want.
>
> Steve
Isn't this the same thing as releasing an unofficial update? I know people want
parts, and something needs to be done.
I went back into the emails I have and read your latest message about the Parts
Tracker progress and Dan's comments you pasted. You recently mentioned he is
busy - Dan (or Steve if you know), when do you think is a reasonable timeframe
to get a testable version up on the server? When do you think is a reasonable
timeframe to get the official parts release out?
I think that we need to make a final decision about the parts update and
announce it - and assure the users that it is being worked on. To me that means
in a separate thread, possibly to .announce, and posted on the site.
Tonight I'll keep churning on the SSI for the site, and throw together some news
to put up.
-Tim
|
|
| |
In lugnet.cad.dev, Rolf Redford writes:
> HMM a minor idea. group all Unofficial parts in "Unofficial" group like
> "brick" and "plate" type of group.
That's a good idea, but it requires editing *all* of the files to be
released. The idea of an unofficial release is that it's quick'n'dirty - as
little work as possible. Processing a large number files, even if it is
just a minor change, takes some time.
Steve
|
|
| |
Just use a script to do that or even a small program, I don't think you
need to manually change each file.
Leonardo
----- Original Message -----
From: "Steve Bliss" <steve.bliss@home.com>
To: <lugnet.cad.dev@lugnet.com>; <lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw@lugnet.com>
Sent: Tuesday, May 01, 2001 4:37 PM
Subject: Re: We need an update NOW (Was: Parts Update?)
> In lugnet.cad.dev, Rolf Redford writes:
> > HMM a minor idea. group all Unofficial parts in "Unofficial" group like
> > "brick" and "plate" type of group.
>
> That's a good idea, but it requires editing *all* of the files to be
> released. The idea of an unofficial release is that it's quick'n'dirty - • as
> little work as possible. Processing a large number files, even if it is
> just a minor change, takes some time.
>
> Steve
>
|
|
|
