 | | Re: Another part review question - about headers —Jim DeVona
| | | | (...) Hi Willy, Thanks for the background. So, if the header just needs to be cleaned up, you recommend novote with a note about the header format? If I can ask for one more example, how would you respond to a header like this? 0 Car Mudguard 4 1/2 (...) (16 years ago, 17-Jun-08, to lugnet.cad)
| | | | | | | | | | Re: Another part review question - about headers —Steve Bliss
| | | | | | (...) If the header is the only problem, certifying is fine -- just note the issue, so the admins can clean up the header later. If it's a question of the header's content (ie, "is that the right title?", etc), then you might go for novote. (...) (...) (16 years ago, 17-Jun-08, to lugnet.cad)
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | Re: Another part review question - about headers —Jim DeVona
| | | | | | | (...) Thanks, Steve. I wasn't sure there even were issues with the header - I was just looking for example reviews, and trying to figure out what purpose, if any, the specifications play. Jim (16 years ago, 17-Jun-08, to lugnet.cad)
| | | | | | | | | | | | | Re: Another part review question - about headers —Willy Tschager
| | | | | (...) Hi Jim, since the admins check the header and also modify them before shipping (Unofficial to Official for example) I would just "novote with comments" for NEWLY submitted parts to make the author aware of the new specs and the tools (...) (16 years ago, 17-Jun-08, to lugnet.cad)
| | | | | | |
