Subject:
|
Re: Planes for a new download-tool (2) (fwd)
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.cad.dev
|
Date:
|
Wed, 26 Jul 2000 13:11:48 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
1365 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.cad.dev, Rui Manuel Silva Martins writes:
> Well, by the E-mails I have read, it looked to me, that we where discussing a
> general tool, which could be used by ldraw.org and several (ldraw) software
> developers to maintain the current version up to date and easylly available to
> users.
I suppose that this could be discussed, but it wasn't what was originally
being discussed. That's where the confusion came in.
> > IMO, we don't need multiple domain names for this type of software.
>
> Each software developer may want to provide a home (website) for their
> software !
>
> > It all works with the same file system and format,
>
> if we are using the HTTP header, this shouldn't be a problem !
I'm not understanding.
> > it would be 1) confusing to the user
>
> Why ?
>
> > and 2) an unnecessary duplication of efforts.
>
> Where ?
> in maintaining several sites with different software ?
>
> This is already beeing done !
I realize that. I'm talking about large websites with their own domains. The
whole reason for ldraw.org is a site to be central to the DAT file format, and
supporting whatever software which is developed (with the intent of modelling
Lego) which utilizes it. I'd ask you to please tone down your future replies
as well. May I remind you that you did post a private email discussion
without the concent of both parties, also something that I consider to be
improper netiquette.
> And if we don't need to mess with the server setup (regular HTTP), then its
> even easyer (like a download directory).
What does this have to do with multiple sites/servers? This would seem to
argue _against_ your proposal of spreading things out - because there would be
multiple servers to set up, if I'm understanding that phrase right.
> But, I don't intent to force any Ldraw users/developers to make this GENERIC
> software "download tool" that I am talking about.
In all sincerity, you are coming off that way from my perspective.
The idea in and of itself is a good one, but the methods of discussion aren't
the greatest, IMO. It would be great if something like this came about, but
it would require a lot of work for a lot of people.
-Tim
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
 | | Re: Planes for a new download-tool (2)
|
| (...) I'm speaking about a technicallity, the HTTP protocol, sometimes known as the web protocol. (see any URL, ex: HTTP:\\www.ldraw.org) (...) I absolutly agree ! (...) I never ment to SHOUT ? I don't know why, but it appears that here at lugnet, (...) (24 years ago, 26-Jul-00, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Re: Planes for a new download-tool (2) (fwd)
|
| (...) What I mean, and also what I tought others ment too, is that a download tool is usefull to download files (within a Directory and eventually under its subtree), if the files represent software programs or *.dat files or whatever, it should be (...) (24 years ago, 26-Jul-00, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
8 Messages in This Thread:
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
