 | | Re: Lugnet.cad.dat heirarchy
|
|
[Added lugnet.cad.dev to newsgroups list] (...) A little bit, yes, but not a lot. Since you bring it up, now a good time to give it a second round of consideration. Here are some of my thoughts: One thing that would work out nicely in the .parts (...) (26 years ago, 3-Apr-99, to lugnet.admin.general, lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: New guidelines on parts and numbers (long)
|
|
***...*** REPLY SEPARATOR ***...*** (...) Sounds good to me. The part number for that piece is the same as any other 2x4 brick, 3001. I didn't read through the whole original message, but I assume you are planning to have a totally new category for (...) (26 years ago, 2-Apr-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: clean up the parts tracker!
|
|
(...) Yes, I am. Sometime. I've got a bunch of other half-done pieces which are more important. Steve (26 years ago, 2-Apr-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: How big is your VEC dir?
|
|
(...) I believe it's actually on Gyug's list to do, but he doesn't yet have the routines to reduce a 24-bit image before saving as an 8-bit bmp. Cheers, - jsproat (26 years ago, 2-Apr-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: clean up the parts tracker!
|
|
by abandoned i mean like steves canoe :) are you ever going to finish it steve? (26 years ago, 2-Apr-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: How big is your VEC dir?
|
|
How big is my what!? Oh.... Right now, mine is 14 mb. Yep, 14,722,692. But I have it rendered at 50% *and* I used a batch conversion to reduce the LDLite output to 8 bits.(1) Sure it took a while, but the savings were significant. If I remember (...) (26 years ago, 2-Apr-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: New guidelines on parts and numbers (long)
|
|
(...) Quite possibly a good idea. Somebody with authoring skills and freetime to maintain it would be needed. (...) That would probably be the best idea. We will occasionally have pieces that require special handling. That is unavoidable. Steve's (...) (26 years ago, 2-Apr-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: New guidelines on parts and numbers (long)
|
|
(...) It would more likely be that we use 3-digit numbers with some kind of modifier. As 3-digits are already established as being temporary. I believe that using any four digit numbers, with or without some modifier, would not be wise. -- Terry K (...) (26 years ago, 2-Apr-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: New guidelines on parts and numbers (long)
|
|
(...) I really see no way out of doing it. An existing 8xxxx will, by definition, most likely have to go into a '_' category as a hard-coded piece. That would leave us without a corresponding #16 piece to use. So if we want that piece in #16, it (...) (26 years ago, 2-Apr-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Part Request: 30200
|
|
I asked about this part a while back, and ended up making a crude mock-up for it. I'm using it in a new Pallas Spaceworks vessel, but in such a way that my mock-up looks horrible. Is anyone working on this or willing to work on it? I'll mail you the (...) (26 years ago, 2-Apr-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
