 | | Re: Should .dat content be allowed in cad.dev.org.ldraw?
|
|
(...) That's the solution right there. Except that lcd doesn't allow DAT content either. Does it? Steve (25 years ago, 19-Aug-99, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | Re: Should .dat content be allowed in cad.dev.org.ldraw?
|
|
Steve Bliss <blisses@worldnet.att.net> wrote in message news:37bc6cfc.238280...net.com... (...) Well, mine went through today in cad.dev, but not cad.dev.org.ldraw. Note that it was only 1 line of DAT content, as actual DAT files belong in the (...) (25 years ago, 19-Aug-99, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | Re: Should .dat content be allowed in cad.dev.org.ldraw?
|
|
(...) Yup, lugnet.cad.dev allows DAT content, but doesn't require* it. --Todd * The only group which has ever actually required DAT content is the obsolete lugnet.cad.dat group. (25 years ago, 19-Aug-99, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | Re: Should .dat content be allowed in cad.dev.org.ldraw?
|
|
(...) That makes sense: DAT code embedded in other text is no longer valid DAT code. Steve (25 years ago, 20-Aug-99, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | Re: Should .dat content be allowed in cad.dev.org.ldraw?
|
|
Todd Lehman <lehman@javanet.com> wrote in message news:37bc7cfc.266795...net.com... (...) Could a group be designed to require DAT content to an initial post, but not to follow-ups? (Yes I realize this may be more trouble than it's worth, so please (...) (25 years ago, 20-Aug-99, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | Re: Should .dat content be allowed in cad.dev.org.ldraw?
|
|
(...) Yeah. You mean like all of the .cad.dat.* sub-groups? That sounds like an excellent idea. (...) Not much trouble at all. --Todd (25 years ago, 20-Aug-99, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
