|
|
 | | Re: LSC Proposal 0.99
|
| (...) I think both LDraw.org and the community at large would benefit from it being mirrored. And another beauty of mirroring an archive like this is that it's so easy to set up that even if there's not a perceived burning need for it, the long-term (...) (21 years ago, 17-May-03, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
| | | | | Re: mailing list linkage
|
| (...) Oh, that's a good point. Yes, it's a bit long, but as Steve points out, it's a relatively low-interest group. Putting it as .ldraw.tech instead of .ldraw-tech also makes it cleaner if other lists (such as, say, Tim's ldraw-siggraph list) (...) (21 years ago, 17-May-03, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
| | | | | Re: LSC Proposal 0.99
|
| (...) This sounds like a cool idea, but I don't think there's a need for it right now. The techies list is kinda low-interest -- it's good to have a public archive of the list (which we've already got), but I don't see a burning need to mirror it (...) (21 years ago, 17-May-03, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
| | | | | Re: mailing list linkage
|
| (...) I think lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw.tech is long but it fits in with the existing scheme -Orion (21 years ago, 17-May-03, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw, lugnet.cad)
| | | | | Re: mailing list linkage
|
| (...) Cool. Hmm, which to choose... It makes less work for me doing it the mailing list way, because of the incoming gateway translations at the e-mail level. What do we want to call it here? lugnet.cad.ldraw-tech? lugnet.cad.ldraw.tech? --Todd (21 years ago, 17-May-03, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw, lugnet.cad)
|
|
