Subject:
|
Re: lugnet.duplo/toolo
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.admin.general
|
Date:
|
Sat, 27 Mar 1999 19:31:35 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
1412 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.admin.general, lar@voyager.net (Larry Pieniazek) writes:
> Todd Lehman wrote:
> > In the current list above, BTW, note the (undesirable) duplicity
> > between lugnet.lego.system.trains and lugnet.trains. Not sure yet
> > what to do about that (or the LEGO MindStorms group for that matter).
>
> Well, IMHO, if you decide to institute these groups using this
> prefixing, I'd argue that lulgnet.trains should be renamed to
> lugnet.lego.system.trains rather than there being two groups.
That's what I'm hoping people will say generally. Not too much talk of
DUPLO trains in the lugnet.trains group anyway, right?
> Ditto for mindstorms,
This one is a real challenge because of the gatewayed lego-robotics
mailing list and because the current robotics group isn't purely
MindStorms/RCX-focused (although it mostly is).
> and for starwars for that matter
Agreed about that!
> (which under this naming,
> should become lugnet.lego.system.space.starwars).
Except that the LEGO Star Wars System isn't a subcategory of the LEGO
Space System. SW is its own system in the LEGO product hierarchy, as
different from Space as Aquazone and Rock Raiders. The fact that there
aren't any more LEGO Space System sets coming out is due to a licensing
agreement with Lucasfilms, Ltd. which prevents LEGO from releasing any
non-SW space ships without wheels for the duration of the SW license.
They can make Space Port space ships without wheels because those aren't
space -- they're part of Town. Underground/Rock Raiders conveniently
fills in the gap left open by the absence of the LEGO Space System.
Will the LEGO Space System come back after the SW license ends? Dunno.
But SW sure ain't part of Space!
> Having two of each kind of group seems wrong, somehow.
Yeah.
> However I'm not sure I support this naming convention. It's unwieldy.
Would you prefer abbreviations?
> What do the extra prefixes really buy you, after all?
You'll see. Trust me.
--Todd
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
 | | Re: lugnet.duplo/toolo
|
| (...) No. Use fully spelled out names, they are easier to remember. We don't all use "I" for variable names any more, either. But my real point didn't come across very clearly. I think lugnet.trains, with a charter that allows both system, and (...) (26 years ago, 28-Mar-99, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Re: lugnet.duplo/toolo
|
| (...) Well, IMHO, if you decide to institute these groups using this prefixing, I'd argue that lulgnet.trains should be renamed to lugnet.lego.system.trains rather than there being two groups. Ditto for mindstorms, and for starwars for that matter (...) (26 years ago, 27-Mar-99, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
14 Messages in This Thread:
 
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
