 | | We need an update NOW (Was: Parts Update?)
|
|
(...) Okay, this is getting ridiculous. We need a parts update. There are, what, hundreds?, of parts wasting in the pipeline. How much longer are they going to sit there? How can holding the parts for this long be justified? Give me unofficial (...) (24 years ago, 30-Apr-01, to lugnet.cad.dev, lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: We need an update NOW (Was: Parts Update?)
|
|
(...) Perhaps we could break the job into smaller chunks, like maybe 20 parts a week to relieve the pipeline pressure. -Chuck (24 years ago, 30-Apr-01, to lugnet.cad.dev, lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: We need an update NOW (Was: Parts Update?)
|
|
"Chuck Sommerville" <chucks@he.net> wrote in message news:GCMILA.AwH@lugnet.com... (...) I've been pushing for this inside for quite some time, with little response. Even splitting up the work for a big update among some of us who discuss LDraw.org (...) (24 years ago, 30-Apr-01, to lugnet.cad.dev, lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: We need an update NOW (Was: Parts Update?)
|
|
(...) I'm not understanding here. The parts are available in file form in a some cluster in some repository somewhere, yes? Publishing them, even in an unofficial process, would simply consist of putting them on a server. There would be little-to-no (...) (24 years ago, 30-Apr-01, to lugnet.cad.dev, lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: We need an update NOW (Was: Parts Update?)
|
|
"Tim Courtney" <tim@zacktron.com> wrote in message news:GCMIxI.BvL@lugnet.com... (...) this (...) Just sent another email to a few people about this. I hope there'll be some progress. -Tim (24 years ago, 30-Apr-01, to lugnet.cad.dev, lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: We need an update NOW (Was: Parts Update?)
|
|
"Sproaticus" <jsproat@io.com> wrote in message news:GCMJot.E07@lugnet.com... (...) this (...) Kinda unrelated statement, I intended it to reflect more the project as a whole. I think (and I accept that this will never be the case) that the whole (...) (24 years ago, 30-Apr-01, to lugnet.cad.dev, lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: We need an update NOW (Was: Parts Update?)
|
|
(...) This isn't really a matter of patience; it's been far too long than it needs to be. We need a better system. In the mean-time, the factors contributing to the delay can be addressed, and quickly. e.g. What are the factors holding back the (...) (24 years ago, 30-Apr-01, to lugnet.cad.dev, lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: We need an update NOW (Was: Parts Update?)
|
|
(...) It can't be "justified", but stamping one's foot isn't going to help, Jeremy, and you know that. I think what we need is an unoffical update. Package them up as unofficial and tell people to take their chances. But realise that there is (...) (24 years ago, 30-Apr-01, to lugnet.cad.dev, lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: We need an update NOW (Was: Parts Update?)
|
|
(...) Fine, okay, you can call it what you want. The fact remains, something needs to be done. I'm making it known the only way I know how. The delay in the parts update system is becoming pretty unpopular, and it begs the question: is this being (...) (24 years ago, 30-Apr-01, to lugnet.cad.dev, lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: We need an update NOW (Was: Parts Update?)
|
|
I mostly agree so I mostly snipped... (...) How does that help? That is, suppose it would take 40 man hours of work to resolve the bottleneck and get the new process on line and running. If that 40 hours avoids 400 or 4000 hours of user effort, (...) (24 years ago, 30-Apr-01, to lugnet.cad.dev, lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: We need an update NOW (Was: Parts Update?)
|
|
(...) The bugger here is that we could play what-if with the schedule all year long. I won't do that. (...) Why not? Aren't the users why the whole LDraw thing happens, anyway? (...) I would, but only to get it done my way -- quick & cheap & dirty. (...) (24 years ago, 30-Apr-01, to lugnet.cad.dev, lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: We need an update NOW (Was: Parts Update?)
|
|
(...) Ummmm.... Isn't that what the lugnet.cad.dat.parts newsgroup (or Tore's temp parts tracker) is for? You go looking for the part you want and install it. That's what I've been doing. What I wanted when I asked my original question (which has (...) (24 years ago, 30-Apr-01, to lugnet.cad.dev, lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: We need an update NOW (Was: Parts Update?)
|
|
I've been playing with ldraw and all it's wonderful part for only a short time now. What I don't understand in this discussion is what is the difference in an 'offical' vs 'unoffical' part. Apart from whewre I can download offical part what is (...) (24 years ago, 30-Apr-01, to lugnet.cad.dev, lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: We need an update NOW (Was: Parts Update?)
|
|
(...) Orion, you bring up a great idea that could solve the problem in the interum. Take all the parts you can find on Tore's tracker and in the parts newsgroup, put them in a self extracting archive or .zip file, and post the file somewhere like (...) (24 years ago, 1-May-01, to lugnet.cad.dev, lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: We need an update NOW (Was: Parts Update?)
|
|
I think I'll do that, if I can find the time (work in the real world's going to get pretty hectic over the next month). Thanks Chuck. -Orion (24 years ago, 1-May-01, to lugnet.cad.dev, lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: We need an update NOW (Was: Parts Update?)
|
|
(...) You might also ask the parts author's permission before including their parts in the "pre-release". Some people can be touchy about this. I'm not a parts author, so no need to ask me. -Chuck (24 years ago, 1-May-01, to lugnet.cad.dev, lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: We need an update NOW (Was: Parts Update?)
|
|
(...) OK, so I lied, I guess I am a parts author of sorts: (URL) are on Tore's tracker. Feel free to include my updated heads. -Chuck (24 years ago, 1-May-01, to lugnet.cad.dev, lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: We need an update NOW (Was: Parts Update?)
|
|
Hello Larry, Jeremy I'm following this thread very closely... and i have to jump in at this point. (...) I think Tim has waited to long to get help from other volunteers. There has been at least some people in the newsgroups and some via email (...) (24 years ago, 1-May-01, to lugnet.cad.dev, lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: We need an update NOW (Was: Parts Update?)
|
|
Hello Chuck, (...) temp (...) it. (...) Yes. That is a nice idea but some of the parts dont still have pattern numbers or copyrights are missing or something like that. (...) parts (...) the (...) pre-release. (...) Hmm.. I am a parts authour but I (...) (24 years ago, 1-May-01, to lugnet.cad.dev, lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: We need an update NOW (Was: Parts Update?)
|
|
"Carsten Schmitz" <casz@gmx.de> wrote in message news:GCMtBs.ByD@lugnet.com... (...) Good point, and I agree. I've gotta work out some management stuff on my own - especially this week. I'll also be lowering my standards of expectations for (...) (24 years ago, 1-May-01, to lugnet.cad.dev, lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: We need an update NOW (Was: Parts Update?)
|
|
As you can imagine, behind the scenes discussion is running fast and furious (not in the Mad sense, in the fast sense...oh never mind) The following are rambles/my opinions, not official statements of position (remember I am the nonvoting member who (...) (24 years ago, 1-May-01, to lugnet.cad.dev, lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: We need an update NOW (Was: Parts Update?)
|
|
(...) I don't think that unofficial parts should be published from LDraw. How about simply encouraging the parts authors to post their parts to lugnet.cad.dat.parts? That way, people can see which parts are in the pipeline. Besides, people can (...) (24 years ago, 1-May-01, to lugnet.cad.dev, lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: We need an update NOW (Was: Parts Update?)
|
|
(...) Most unofficial parts ARE posted to lugnet.cad.dat.parts Either that or they are available for download from the web :) (24 years ago, 1-May-01, to lugnet.cad.dev, lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: We need an update NOW (Was: Parts Update?)
|
|
(...) It seems to me that LDraw has become a project of secrecy and inside work. When did it stop being an "open" project? When did discussions concerning LDraw cease to be done in the open? I think I missed this. I realize that whoever work with (...) (24 years ago, 1-May-01, to lugnet.cad.dev, lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: We need an update NOW (Was: Parts Update?)
|
|
(...) Well, when an official vote/update is announced, I'm am usually impressed at the number of new parts that I have not yet seen. So I was assuming that those parts had been submitted without having been posted, and that this still goes on. (...) (24 years ago, 1-May-01, to lugnet.cad.dev, lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: We need an update NOW (Was: Parts Update?)
|
|
(...) Agree - unofficial means they may change - and if the change is to the origin or orientation then users will get (even more) upset. (...) I always do, ((URL) except maybe bug-fixes, BUT (...) ... I rarely get any comment, good or bad. (...) (...) (24 years ago, 1-May-01, to lugnet.cad.dev, lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: We need an update NOW (Was: Parts Update?)
|
|
(...) That's too bad. I notice your parts, but I rarely comment on them because I'm not into those kind of parts that you model. Your parts are commonly related to minifigs, and I rarely use them. Besides, your parts are nearly always perfect (...) (24 years ago, 1-May-01, to lugnet.cad.dev, lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: We need an update NOW (Was: Parts Update?)
|
|
"Tim Courtney" <tim@zacktron.com> wrote in message news:GCMuJ8.E5M@lugnet.com... (...) the (...) attached. (...) I think this needs a little modification - if the parts could be zipped separately then people could just get the ones they want, and as (...) (24 years ago, 1-May-01, to lugnet.cad.dev, lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: We need an update NOW (Was: Parts Update?)
|
|
"Chris Dee" <chris_w_dee@hotmail.com> wrote in message news:GCnMwn.Axw@lugnet.com... (...) I've only done one part so far and I've had just 4 comments (1 on an "almost done it" post, 2 on a "done it but no optional lines yet", and 1 by private (...) (24 years ago, 1-May-01, to lugnet.cad.dev, lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: We need an update NOW (Was: Parts Update?)
|
|
"Chris Dee" <chris_w_dee@hotmail.com> wrote in message news:GCnMwn.Axw@lugnet.com... (...) Disagree. We package the parts and put a whoppin disclaimer on them. They are not official, just compiled and made easily available. We make it clear that (...) (24 years ago, 1-May-01, to lugnet.cad.dev, lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: We need an update NOW (Was: Parts Update?)
|
|
"Fredrik Glöckner" <fredrik.glockner@bio.uio.no> wrote in message news:qrd1yq98itn.fsf....uio.no... (...) Its not a matter of hiding the work, see below. (...) This is the case. Newsgroup discussions get noisy - people tend to have long drawn out (...) (24 years ago, 1-May-01, to lugnet.cad.dev, lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: We need an update NOW (Was: Parts Update?)
|
|
(...) This would work. Just don't take Steve off of the new system -- with him working on it, it's gonna be good. Cheers, - jsproat (24 years ago, 1-May-01, to lugnet.cad.dev, lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: We need an update NOW (Was: Parts Update?)
|
|
(...) Thank you Fredrik, for so succinctly expressing what I was feeling. I was building up a lot of frustration because I felt I had to make a loud noise in order to be heard. (...) I think the discussions should still be in the open. No consensus (...) (24 years ago, 1-May-01, to lugnet.cad.dev, lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: We need an update NOW (Was: Parts Update?)
|
|
(...) Let's not reinvent the wheel. This process is already largely done, I would think, as part of the new parts update system now in development. The interim solution needs to be quick & easy for the implementors. Cheers, - jproat (24 years ago, 1-May-01, to lugnet.cad.dev, lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: We need an update NOW (Was: Parts Update?)
|
|
(...) You can't have your cake and eat it too, Jeremy! Who do you think would be doing a significant portion (hopefully not all, but non zero) of the packaging task? ++Lar (24 years ago, 1-May-01, to lugnet.cad.dev, lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: We need an update NOW (Was: Parts Update?)
|
|
(...) Zipping up the parts already collected: 5 minutes Writing the disclaimer: 2 minutes Uploading zipfile and disclaimer to LDRAW.ORG: 3 minutes Catching the warm glow as the parts preview is released: Priceless. For the really big tasks there's a (...) (24 years ago, 1-May-01, to lugnet.cad.dev, lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: We need an update NOW (Was: Parts Update?)
|
|
(...) Do you really think this is a 10 minute job? If so you must really have a low opinion of the gang, then, that they would hold out on you to save a mere 10 minutes of their time. I hope that's not the case, but rather that you're just really (...) (24 years ago, 1-May-01, to lugnet.cad.dev, lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: We need an update NOW (Was: Parts Update?)
|
|
(...) Well tell me then. Larry. How hard is it to just zip up the parts that have already been submitted, and why? Are they all not sitting in a directory somewhere on someone's hard drive? Or are they really scattered in an ad-hoc fashion? Trust (...) (24 years ago, 1-May-01, to lugnet.cad.dev, lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: We need an update NOW (Was: Parts Update?)
|
|
(...) The problem I see with releasing the current unofficial parts in a single download is that it's going to make it harder for anyone who wants to help out in checking individual parts - they're going to have to download a large ZIP file of parts (...) (24 years ago, 1-May-01, to lugnet.cad.dev, lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: We need an update NOW (Was: Parts Update?)
|
|
(...) I think Chris is right. It will be challenging to disclaim an unofficial update in a way that nobody will get upset later. When we do officialize the pieces, there will be orientation changes, and different part numbers with no forwarding (...) (24 years ago, 1-May-01, to lugnet.cad.dev, lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: We need an update NOW (Was: Parts Update?)
|
|
(...) I think I can use my part-voting-preparation utilities to generate a webpage like the ones we use for voting. So people could check out what the unofficial parts are, and either download them all in one shot, or just grab what they want. Steve (24 years ago, 1-May-01, to lugnet.cad.dev, lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: We need an update NOW (Was: Parts Update?)
|
|
HMM a minor idea. group all Unofficial parts in "Unofficial" group like "brick" and "plate" type of group. -- And they said 'Computers will never be in general use' "Steve Bliss" <steve.bliss@home.com> wrote in message (...) (24 years ago, 1-May-01, to lugnet.cad.dev, lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: We need an update NOW (Was: Parts Update?)
|
|
"Steve Bliss" <steve.bliss@home.com> wrote in message news:p61uetc27fg7opi...4ax.com... (...) I think I see it now. As far as broken models go, we don't want that. I have had a couple of those, and that's frustrating. I got your message in this (...) (24 years ago, 1-May-01, to lugnet.cad.dev, lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: We need an update NOW (Was: Parts Update?)
|
|
how about making all unofficial parts go to "unofficial" group like bricks and plates? -- And they said 'Computers will never be in general use' "Sproaticus" <jsproat@io.com> wrote in message news:GCo1LK.Gpx@lugnet.com... (...) have (...) (24 years ago, 1-May-01, to lugnet.cad.dev, lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: We need an update NOW (Was: Parts Update?)
|
|
(...) That's a good idea, but it requires editing *all* of the files to be released. The idea of an unofficial release is that it's quick'n'dirty - as little work as possible. Processing a large number files, even if it is just a minor change, takes (...) (24 years ago, 1-May-01, to lugnet.cad.dev, lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: We need an update NOW (Was: Parts Update?)
|
|
Just use a script to do that or even a small program, I don't think you need to manually change each file. Leonardo ----- Original Message ----- From: "Steve Bliss" <steve.bliss@home.com> To: <lugnet.cad.dev@lugnet.com>; (...) (24 years ago, 1-May-01, to lugnet.cad.dev, lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: We need an update NOW (Was: Parts Update?)
|
|
HeeHeee! I have great faith in Tim that one day LDraw will become an open project, but I don't think it has ever been one in the past! :) As soon as the parts library is opened up, I promise I'll check it all into Sourceforge.org, so one can use (...) (24 years ago, 2-May-01, to lugnet.cad.dev, lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: We need an update NOW (Was: Parts Update?)
|
|
(...) This sounds almost like communistic ideology: For the project to ultimately become open, it must first become more closed for a while! ;-) (...) That's undoubtedly an interesting idea. Fredrik (24 years ago, 2-May-01, to lugnet.cad.dev, lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: We need an update NOW (Was: Parts Update?)
|
|
(...) Paul, I don't know if you saw earlier messages about the Part Tracker, but there was some discussion about whether or not we could use CVS as a backend to an automated system. What do you think? There are a number of features we need that (I (...) (24 years ago, 2-May-01, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: We need an update NOW (Was: Parts Update?)
|
|
(...) I'll go look up the discussion. I'm just getting back into the swing of things. I think CVS would be a great way of distributing the parts. There's clearly some managment tools needed to help with organizing the submissions and reviews of new (...) (24 years ago, 3-May-01, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: We need an update NOW (Was: Parts Update?)
|
|
(...) I think a small script running "l3p -check" called from within the CVS commitinfo file would work great for this. (...) (24 years ago, 3-May-01, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
