 | | Re: Issues with a Few Parts on the Tracker
|
|
(...) I would say that it's a good thing to leave them in. 2 reasons for this: - Once developers decide they want to support it, the implementation is aleady there. - To remove them would force all the parts that have the command to go thruogh PT (...) (22 years ago, 11-Apr-04, to lugnet.cad.dat.parts)
|
| |
| | Re: Issues with a Few Parts on the Tracker
|
|
(...) Thanks. What would the downside be of, over time, as parts go through review and renewal anyway, gradually discontinuing the use of this command? It is not a large number of parts that use this anyway, right? ++Lar (22 years ago, 11-Apr-04, to lugnet.cad.dat.parts)
|
| |
| | Re: Snatch it?
|
|
(...) Well guys, no dice. We sent an Email in Japanese to every address we could find. Thay all bounced undeliverable. I guess this means that if you want to use his parts then you'll have to rework them for PT complience and then submit giving (...) (22 years ago, 11-Apr-04, to lugnet.cad.dat.parts)
|
| |
| | Re: Issues with a Few Parts on the Tracker
|
|
(...) Basically the CMDLINE staement specifies a default color for the part. This is useful if the part only came in one color. I far as I know, no LDraw programs actually use this Meta command. -Orion (22 years ago, 11-Apr-04, to lugnet.cad.dat.parts)
|
| |
| | Re: Issues with a Few Parts on the Tracker
|
|
(...) Could we have a review/explanation of the use of CMDLINE again? (or a pointer to documentation). While I support not making unnecessary changes, I'm not sure I understand if this one is necessary or not. (22 years ago, 11-Apr-04, to lugnet.cad.dat.parts)
|
