 | | Re: We need an update NOW (Was: Parts Update?) —Fredrik Glöckner
|
| | | (...) 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?) —Tim Courtney
|
| | | | | "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?) —Jeremy H. Sproat
|
| | | | | (...) 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?) —Paul Gyugyi
|
| | | | 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?) —Fredrik Glöckner
|
| | | | | (...) 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?) —Steve Bliss
|
| | | | (...) 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?) —Paul Gyugyi
|
| | | | (...) 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?) —Don Heyse
|
| | | | (...) 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)
|
| | | | |
