 | | Re: Dome piece from Divers Sets?
|
|
Nevermind, I found it. I checked the Parts Tracker, saw it was done by Thomas Burger, then checked the Lugnet links page to find Thomas' Pages, and downloaded it from there. <whew> -Andy Lynch ----- Original Message ----- From: "Andy Lynch" (...) (24 years ago, 14-Dec-00, to lugnet.cad)
|
| |
| | Dome piece from Divers Sets?
|
|
Hello all, I was looking for the clear domes that are used in the Divers sets, among others. These are the 6 x 6 x ? domes that attach to a plate or tile with 5 fingers. Someone said that there was an unnofficial part made, but with the search (...) (24 years ago, 14-Dec-00, to lugnet.cad)
|
| |
| | Re: License revision 1
|
|
(...) For points made previously in the thread, I think. Basically, I think if our aim is to free users/distributors/developers to use the library however they want, forcing them to release source code is a *big* contradiction of the aim of the (...) (24 years ago, 14-Dec-00, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: new lego-cad part: x474.dat, "Arm Piece with Towball and Stud"
|
|
(...) Really. How extraordinary. I must have been off my rocker when I made that part. I wonder if there was any particular reason I chose that measurement, or if I was just feeling rebellious. Thanks for pointing this out. I'll double-check the (...) (24 years ago, 14-Dec-00, to lugnet.cad.dat.parts)
|
| |
| | Re: New Part - 2527 Plate? 2 x 4 cannon base
|
|
(...) Since both the base and the barrel are unique pieces, neither really needs the dimension. It's not like there's a different cannon base. :) But it doesn't hurt to include the dimensions, either. And it could be useful someday, if LEGO ever (...) (24 years ago, 14-Dec-00, to lugnet.cad.dat.parts)
|
| |
| | Re: Adding new pieces in MLCad
|
|
"Andy Lynch" <andy@andyandjackie.com> wrote in message news:G5IsLC.FuB@lugnet.com... (...) it (...) and Y (...) as (...) becomes (...) the (...) I agree that this would be very helpfull. Since parts are often added in "layers", it makes sense for (...) (24 years ago, 14-Dec-00, to lugnet.cad.mlcad)
|
| |
| | Re: License revision 1
|
|
(...) The idea of making it different for commercial applications was to allow L3P to continue to be distributed under its current license. Now I see that it's a bad thing and #5 should either be completely removed or required for free applications (...) (24 years ago, 14-Dec-00, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: License revision 1
|
|
(...) I only added that because other people requested, I was happy with the initial license. Personally I think that #4 is going to scare people away. (...) It's better, english is not my native language. (...) Ok, it seems that a lot of people (...) (24 years ago, 14-Dec-00, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: License - again
|
|
(...) In other words, the contributors grant ldraw.org the rights to do whatever they want with the parts. This should be in the parts submission page, along with a button "I have read and accept the terms of the agreement". It has nothing to do (...) (24 years ago, 14-Dec-00, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: POV difference in LDraw?
|
|
(...) I don't think having the POV-Ray source code will help us here. The problem with LDraw vs POV-Ray is that the difference and other constructive geometry functions in POV-Ray use the inside vs outside concept. Ie, a POV-Ray object can have a (...) (24 years ago, 14-Dec-00, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
