Subject:
|
Re: Sounds good, however... (from an LDRAW neophyte)
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw
|
Date:
|
Sat, 3 Feb 2001 03:09:52 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
608 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw, Pat Hough writes:
> FORWARD: Please accept my comments in the civil spirit in which they were
> intended, and not an attempt to start some sort of conflict. I asked some
> very tough questions because the proposal seemed to advocate it. This is
> also a somewhat long response, but in the end it is only because this sounds
> like a decent idea that just needs a good bit of discussion.
OK. Actually, there has been a good bit of discussion around these topics.
But it would be a good idea to address them again. I'm going to snip/quote
your message pretty heavily (and respond to things out of order). Y'all can
assume that whatever I cut out, I agree with.
> One of the goals I would like to see set by this group is a serious effort
> to simplify the entire gamut of the LDraw universe.
Definitely. One big first step is to get a single, definitive download for
the parts library. Currently, the parts library is spread across four
files, with about 50% redundancy between the files. Which leads to...
> Why license agreements?
Because part authors are donating their creations to the common good. We
need to make it clear what it is they are donating, and what people can do
with the parts when they download them. A written license will spell these
things out, in plain and simple terms.
A lot of people don't really care about a documented agreement, but some
people care very much about it. Some of those people are parts authors, and
some are file redistributors. Some are probably even users.
> - Offer a step-by-step procedure to new users on how to install LDRAW
> and its various siblings (i.e. MLCAD) to their PCs, explaining the
> difference between each. I am still having trouble determining which is
> which and whether one is the "main" program and another is an "add-on", etc.
That's already an on-going effort. Hopefully, having a formal organization
will enable us to proceed faster with guides and informational materials.
> Plus, there are a plethora of bugs out there.
True. Michael generally responds quickly with bug fixes. And if anyone
wants to fix the bugs in LDAO, the source is available. :)
> - Form an approved glossary, defining such off-world terms as
> "Ray-Tracing" and DAT files among others, and what these things mean in
> relation to the whole LDraw concept. Given a quiz on the subject, I'd get a
> Z minus.
Good idea for the FAQ.
> I don't mean some type of catalog listing every site; that of course is
> impossible, but rather, a directory of information that organizes and adds
> links overtime, showing such things as "New Users: Start Here" and "Finished
> Installing? Now add Your Parts Lists" (followed by links).
Check <http://www.ldraw.org/>. In the upper right-hand corner of the main
page, click the "Get Started Now" link.
> I find it irksome that a version of the program that is known to cause
> run-time errors in most modern PCs has not been improved to alleviate this
> error.
Agreed.
> I guess the one thing I don't want to see an organization like this become
> is an inner-circle type of group where veteran LDraw users can meet to
> congratulate each other on how imaginative they all are while the neophytes
> sit outside wondering what's going on.
A private club is definitely *not* the purpose of having a formal group. We
don't need a formal group to sit around and congratulate each other. We
need a formal group so we can effectively reach out to other people, to make
the software easier to get at, all the things you've mentioned, Pat.
> Why a treasury? Why license agreements?
The license agreement I've already touched on. The issue of a treasury (and
thus, a treasurer) came up a few months ago, when there was an effort to
create an LDraw.org CD-ROM for distribution. We can't burn CD's without
money, and we'd need someone to handle the money.
> Please provide some examples of goals that a formal LCAD group might wish to
> establish, just for the sake of argument.
1. Organize the website to lead new users easily through the process of
installing software, and getting started with it.
2. Create a software CD-ROM, suitable for distribution at public shows.
3. Define new versions of the LDraw language, or replace the existing
language with an entirely new one.
4. Evangelize LDraw and LEGO-style CAD at public events, such as BrickFest
or MindFest.
These are more activities than goals. They could easily be rewritten as goals.
> Perhaps you should add one more representative -- a person from the general
> LUGNET population who is not necessarily a LCAD or LDraw expert but can
> translate the groups activities to the other LUGNET members. Sort of a liasion.
We've already got two of the three biggest noisemakers on LUGNET on the ad
hoc committee. ;) (see <http://news.lugnet.com/people/?n=1396>)
I'm not opposed to having one more person on the ad hoc committee. Pat, are
you volunteering? Anyone else want to have a go?
> > 3. Finalize licensing agreement(s) for the LDraw parts library.
>
> Now that (3) I'd like explained in greater detail.
Licensing has been an on-again, off-again topic of discussion for some time.
But without a formal body to make an actual decision, we haven't been able
to move ahead on the idea.
> Selection of members: Yes. Goals: Not without some answers. I mean, it
> sounds frighteningly like you're attempting to tighten control over
> something I thought was public domain. Maybe I'm missing something here.
Yes and no. We're tring to organize the process. That's one meaning of
"control". We're not interested in restricting anything.
BTW, none of this is public domain. LDraw and the original LDraw parts
library are the copyrighted materials of James Jessiman's family. The newer
parts (and updated parts) are in "domain limbo". By default, they are the
copyrighted material of their authors. But the authors freely donated them
to the LDraw parts library without making any kind of agreement about their use.
That's enough rambling from me, for now. I hope I've addressed some of your
concerns, Pat. That's what this newsgroup is here for.
Steve
sbliss@ldraw.org
|
|
Message is in Reply To:
21 Messages in This Thread:
 
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
