 | | Re: Non-TLG Parts
|
|
(...) Yeah... I was just being conservative/literal in my interpretation of the charter for the .cad.dat group. I think it really should be modified to say that it's for .DAT files based on LEGO-brand elements only. (Would this cause great unrest? I (...) (26 years ago, 12-Feb-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Non-TLG Parts
|
|
(...) I'm not sure the appropriate quality-level of MegaBloks could be modeled in LDraw. They'd fit together just as well as LEGO-based LDraw parts. :( Steve (26 years ago, 12-Feb-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Non-TLG Parts
|
|
(...) I thought the expectation (and specification) was that the newsserver lugnet.com was to be used for LEGO-oriented discussion and communication. The *.off-topic hierarchy is just there because we occasionally get off-track. Steve (26 years ago, 12-Feb-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Parts Maintenance Idea
|
|
(...) It's happened on at least one occasion. The problem is with the LDraw library, usually--a part was released with the wrong number, and there is a different part which actually should have that number. (...) AFAIK, TLG doesn't recycle numbers. (...) (26 years ago, 12-Feb-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: DOS Makelist (was Re: Uber-install (was Re: Organizing the Si te Revamp))
|
|
(...) jsproat wrote: (...) ANSI (...) Don't we really have a working makelist? What about makelst2, makelst3, makelis4, makelisb, makelisc, ... If you would like me to, I can quickly make a small and fast makelist using my good old reliable (...) (26 years ago, 12-Feb-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
