 | | Re: ring 3 to 5
|
|
(...) have (...) Are you suggesting that there is (should be) a command to prevent primitive substitution, or that the primitive should be inlined? (...) Agreed. What I was more thinking of is the situation (in the minifig arm) where one region is (...) (25 years ago, 4-May-02, to lugnet.cad.dat.parts.primitives)
|
| |
| | Re: duplicate primitives?
|
|
(...) I think we should move to using the 4-4ringX nomenclature. a) Copy RINGx.DAT (x=1,2,3,4,7) to 4-4RINGx and RING10.DAT to 4-4RIN10.DAT, replacing with ~moved-to files. b) Make the PT reject new submissions that use the old names? c) Automated (...) (25 years ago, 4-May-02, to lugnet.cad.dat.parts.primitives)
|
| |
| | Re: duplicate primitives?
|
|
(...) That makes me feel better, becuase I was the one who submitted those two primitves. We should probably come to some sort of FORMAL decision as to wether to use the old ringX name or move them all into 4-4ringX primitives. (25 years ago, 4-May-02, to lugnet.cad.dat.parts.primitives)
|
| |
| | Re: duplicate primitives?
|
|
(...) Sorry, it was a false alarm. There are no duplicated primitives. AFAIK. Steve (25 years ago, 4-May-02, to lugnet.cad.dat.parts.primitives)
|
| |
| | Re: Part x176
|
|
(...) Shhhh! We don't [buy] want the masses to realise [more] that ldraw.org is really a [technic] front for a fearfully powerful [lego] money-making machine! (...) Well done! I don't think they suspect anything at all, do you? FUT: .o-t.fun ROSCO (25 years ago, 3-May-02, to lugnet.cad.dat.parts, lugnet.off-topic.fun)
|
