To LUGNET HomepageTo LUGNET News HomepageTo LUGNET Guide Homepage
 Help on Searching
 
Post new message to lugnet.cadOpen lugnet.cad in your NNTP NewsreaderTo LUGNET News Traffic PageSign In (Members)
 CAD / 15579
15578  |  15580
Subject: 
Re: Request for more stringent naming of (Complete|Shortcut) parts
Newsgroups: 
lugnet.cad
Date: 
Thu, 18 Sep 2008 01:16:24 GMT
Viewed: 
5524 times
  
In lugnet.cad, Chris Dee wrote:

<snip>

Yes, they should, but the "mistake" was made eight years ago, before we had the
clarity that time brings to standards implementation. The same applies to
754-756, at least.

For backward compatibility reasons we can never remove these files from the
parts directory, as people may have used them directly in models, and we don't
want to break those models. The best we could do is to replace them with "~Moved
to" files that redirect to a file in the parts/s directory. But all that does is
add another file to the library, for little added value.

This dilemma was recognised in the mass header edit that was part of the
Contributor Agreement implementation resulting in the 2008-01 update. The
description lines in these files are now prefixed with a tilde, indicating that
LDraw applications should not list them in their parts list.

This is good to know.  Sorry if I missed that.


Chris

Kevin



Message is in Reply To:
  Re: Request for more stringent naming of (Complete|Shortcut) parts
 
(...) <SNIP> (...) Yes, they should, but the "mistake" was made eight years ago, before we had the clarity that time brings to standards implementation. The same applies to 754-756, at least. For backward compatibility reasons we can never remove (...) (16 years ago, 18-Sep-08, to lugnet.cad)

10 Messages in This Thread:




Entire Thread on One Page:
Nested:  All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:  All | Brief | Compact
    

Custom Search

©2005 LUGNET. All rights reserved. - hosted by steinbruch.info GbR