 | | Re: License - again
|
|
(...) Rather than harm, I think we owe you thanks for having dug in a bit to get another perspective! Thanks! (...) I disagree here, as we have seen in some recent instances of differing versions of parts, we can argue that LDraw parts are artistic (...) (24 years ago, 6-Dec-00, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: License - again
|
|
"Scott A" <eh105jb@mx1.pair.com> wrote in message news:G55oJJ.M9@lugnet.com... (...) cost (...) is (...) The "user" base may be small, but the "viewer" base is much larger. How many times have you seen an LDraw'n model and thought, "I have got to (...) (24 years ago, 6-Dec-00, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: License - again
|
|
(...) Right. Now you're asking the right question. I don't know the answer. (...) True. For instance me. But if a workable royalty scheme and a searchable catalog were introduced, I think I'd be designing like mad and putting one after another up (...) (24 years ago, 6-Dec-00, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | MLCAD Suggestions
|
|
After several weeks of heavy MLCAD use, I offer these suggestions for future versions (or perhaps these features are available and I just haven't found them): Decimals for position: currently if a part's possition contains decimals, pressing one of (...) (24 years ago, 6-Dec-00, to lugnet.cad.mlcad)
|
| |
| | Re: License - again
|
|
I hear you clearly now Larry. However, on reflection, I still think the cost of providing a ldraw import ability into CREATOR II (Son of Creator – or is that blasphemy?) will be more than the benefits it would supply to the _public_. You have to (...) (24 years ago, 6-Dec-00, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: License - again
|
|
I will be the debian maintainer of leocad, so this issue is of interest to me. I asked a few questions about the parts library on the debian-legal mailing list. Here are the questions, answers, and my opinions about them. Please note that I mean no (...) (24 years ago, 6-Dec-00, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: License - again
|
|
(...) I'm sorry, I have to agree with you that it is indeed universally applicable, and yet... not actually relevant to the real question. The real question is this: What is the expected benefit of developing and releasing a CAD program - that is in (...) (24 years ago, 6-Dec-00, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: License - again
|
|
It is a moot point, but I view economics as: “A means by which alternatives may be structured so that a decision may be reached.” Therefore the sunk cost rule is universally applicable. If the conclusion is that the existing CAD set-up is not (...) (24 years ago, 6-Dec-00, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: License - again
|
|
(...) Right, but that's an implied understanding, not an explicit agreement. Basically, there should be a "part submission" page on ldraw.org. One of the features of that page should be a link to a full contributor's agreement. Another necessary (...) (24 years ago, 6-Dec-00, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: License - again
|
|
(...) Just to raise a point, I have both, as both have their place. (...) Great list of attributes. However, they didn't hire Leonardo, for whatever reason, so we may or may not be able to count on them actually happening. (...) I've some (...) (24 years ago, 6-Dec-00, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: License - again
|
|
(...) I agree. But it is a sunk cost. Do you still buy vinyl because you have a record player - or did you move to CD as it was better? (dear reader : please go to .debate to discuss vinyl v CD ) Disregarding sunk costs is a basic law of economics. (...) (24 years ago, 6-Dec-00, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: License - again
|
|
(...) That's information you have and we didn't... so I defer, gladly. However I do want to repeat this: (...) Well, I know what *I* prefer anyway. Open source is better than closed source, LDraw format, warts and all, is at least publicly (...) (24 years ago, 6-Dec-00, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: License - again
|
|
(...) When TLG offered me a job, my first task would be to work in that project so I know what this is all about. I signed an NDA when I was in Billund and I can't talk about it but I think I can say that unless they changed their plans, they won't (...) (24 years ago, 6-Dec-00, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: License - again
|
|
(...) I thought we were close to having the right mods in a previous draft. (...) In view of the implications contained in *this*: (URL) w.r.t. designing your own custom sets for TLC to manufacture for you... I think it is *extremely* important to (...) (24 years ago, 6-Dec-00, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Screensaver anyone?
|
|
I was thinking a realtime render using OpenGL or some such. But I'd be happy with just about anything. -Peter P.S. The Unibots scored the highest average score of the state tournament this past Sunday and took second place as well as the Rookie All (...) (24 years ago, 6-Dec-00, to lugnet.cad.ray)
|
| |
| | Re: Unnoficial Parts (Tiles with Edge)
|
|
(...) Do you mean to do all the tiles without the top face? (that's where I would start if I was going to create a patterned part. That should be no problem. J (24 years ago, 6-Dec-00, to lugnet.cad)
|
| |
| | ldraw.org Holiday Fun
|
|
Here's an idea... Does someone want to take the standard ldraw.org header image, and give it Christmas decorations? I think that would be pretty cool, and would allow someone out there to explore what they can do with enhancing an image. I'll accept (...) (24 years ago, 6-Dec-00, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: Unnoficial Parts (Tiles with Edge)
|
|
(...) Hmm. Would it be worth making subfiles for the 'blank' areas of the patterned parts? I realize these are pretty simple pieces (even with the grooves), but it would help other authors to do this. Steve (24 years ago, 5-Dec-00, to lugnet.cad)
|
| |
| | Re: Unnoficial Parts (Tiles with Edge)
|
|
(...) Sure.. I'll knock that one out tonight.. it really only takes a few minutes for each one. I'll try to hit some of the patterned 1x2s and the rest of the patterned 2x2s as well. J (24 years ago, 5-Dec-00, to lugnet.cad)
|
| |
| | Re: Technic Pneumatic Pumps and Pistons
|
|
(...) Great that someone created those parts, i need the small piston for my ferry. Can you create the technic valve too? Thanks a lot Ludo (24 years ago, 5-Dec-00, to lugnet.cad.dat.parts)
|
