 | | Re: New game: Orphan part of the week
|
|
(...) Making posts like this is a good idea. More communication. :) (...) Definitely don't just update somebody's part without saying something. Emails only take a moment to send. (...) 3-4 months is a long time to wait for a reply to an email. How (...) (20 years ago, 16-Dec-04, to lugnet.cad.dat.parts)
|
| |
| | Re: New game: Orphan part of the week
|
|
(...) I think the method we currently use is good: Make all reasonable efforts to contact the author. If the author doesn't reply after a reasonable period of time (3-4 months is good) then make the fixes needed. Also, many held parts are known to (...) (20 years ago, 15-Dec-04, to lugnet.cad.dat.parts)
|
| |
| | Re: New game: Orphan part of the week
|
|
(...) Yes, I think that sounds like a good idea. The Contributor Agreement we are putting in place addresses taking over orphans inasmuch as authors agree that LDraw.org has: " - The right to create derivative works of the Work" That covers it I (...) (20 years ago, 15-Dec-04, to lugnet.cad.dat.parts)
|
| |
| | Re: New game: Orphan part of the week
|
|
(...) If we have not done so already, I would say we make a 'ophaned parts clause' and display it on the parts tracker pages. I would say if there has been no author or last change author changes or notes for some period of time, the part would be (...) (20 years ago, 15-Dec-04, to lugnet.cad.dat.parts)
|
| |
| | Re: New game: Orphan part of the week
|
|
(...) That's just too funny of a vision not to snicker at. Thanks. (although the Pepsi in my nose isn't going to leave a mark, is it?) (...) I would... although it might be worth dropping a note to the last known addy for John Van Z, after that, if (...) (20 years ago, 14-Dec-04, to lugnet.cad.dat.parts)
|
| |
| | New game: Orphan part of the week
|
|
dear authors, I thought al lot about hold voted parts an orphans over the last couple of weeks. getting a hold vote at the PT to me is almost a slap in the face therefore I try to fix my parts as soon as I can. at the same time I'm also aware that (...) (20 years ago, 14-Dec-04, to lugnet.cad.dat.parts)
|
| |
| | Re: Who Uses Original LDraw? (Was: ... Rocket Launch Pattern)
|
|
(...) We're doing everything we can to secure that, behind the scenes, although we don't yet have it, it's only a communication issue, we're pretty sure. I'd rather not go into more detail than that for privacy reasons. (...) That's a key point. We (...) (20 years ago, 13-Dec-04, to lugnet.cad.dat.parts, lugnet.cad, lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: Who Uses Original LDraw? (Was: ... Rocket Launch Pattern)
|
|
(...) Having an official reference implemention would put us in a better position in several ways. For the parts library, we could resolve a number of nagging issues, like the dithered-colors-have...e-subfiled restriction. For the rendering (...) (20 years ago, 13-Dec-04, to lugnet.cad.dat.parts, lugnet.cad, lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: Who Uses Original LDraw? (Was: ... Rocket Launch Pattern)
|
|
(...) You have some valid points here but I want to respond to this one specifically. The copyright decision has been made. It was finalized a month and a half ago. What are we waiting for? We're are waiting for consent from the Jessiman's to go (...) (20 years ago, 13-Dec-04, to lugnet.cad.dat.parts, lugnet.cad, lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: Who Uses Original LDraw? (Was: ... Rocket Launch Pattern)
|
|
(...) I never knew James; I became aware of LDraw a long time after he has passed away. I have no idea what would be best for the file system, the prog, to honour his accomplishments ... actually I don't care about much. I'm not very good in this (...) (20 years ago, 13-Dec-04, to lugnet.cad.dat.parts, lugnet.cad, lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
