 | | 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 (...) (23 years ago, 3-May-01, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Proposal
|
|
(...) What I'd really like to see, is these tools defaulting to something other than .dat when files are saved. I expect them to all still support .dat. What I'd really like to see is people publishing their files with an extension other than .dat. (...) (23 years ago, 3-May-01, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Unofficial Update Progress
|
|
"Jonathan Wilson" <jonwil@tpgi.com.au> wrote in message news:3AF13FF5.28B262....com.au... (...) totally (...) all (...) available (...) OK, I see what you mean. It would still mean that Steve would have to then check to see if it really is a (...) (23 years ago, 3-May-01, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Proposal
|
|
(...) You and Fredrik are both correct on this, of course. And most tools will accept any extension on files, so if you have a DAT model named whatever.foo, you can still render it in LDraw, LDLite or L3Lab (for example). Steve (23 years ago, 3-May-01, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Unofficial Update Progress
|
|
(...) Yes. And I won't even commit to exactly which one would be released (probably the one I received more recently, because that works with authors sending several different versions of their parts as they fix them). Actually, I don't *think* this (...) (23 years ago, 3-May-01, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Unofficial Update Progress
|
|
(...) I dont mean where there are 2 parts that are identical. I mean that if 2 different authors have both used, say, x123.dat for 2 totally different parts.. In that case, one of them will be renamed to something else anyway when it all becomes (...) (23 years ago, 3-May-01, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Unofficial Update Progress
|
|
"Jonathan Wilson" <jonwil@tpgi.com.au> wrote in message news:3AF0F252.79A88B....com.au... (...) another part (...) them will (...) of them (...) That would be a bit confusing, and if any beginners loaded the unofficial parts (you just know it's (...) (23 years ago, 3-May-01, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Proposal
|
|
(...) I think we should settle for mpd. Let's not bring another extention into this to cause even more confusion. One can always use .mpd on an LDraw file, even if it does not contain any "FILE" keywords, right? So there are no problems related to (...) (23 years ago, 3-May-01, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Unofficial Update Progress
|
|
(...) Does this mean that if there are 2 parts called x530.dat that only one of them will be released? I hope that you would have the sense to take the few minutes to assign one of them to an unused x number :) (23 years ago, 3-May-01, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Proposal
|
|
"Steve Bliss" <steve.bliss@home.com> wrote in message news:k3u0ftckudqbaaf...4ax.com... (...) attached (...) I've been a proponent of .ldr whenever it has come up. I like that, and the other extensions you propose. -Tim (23 years ago, 2-May-01, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Proposal
|
|
(...) How about these: ldr - LDraw (dat) files mpd - Multi-Part lDraw files ldl - files with LDLite language extensions lds - LDScript files mlc - files with MLCad language extensions Steve (23 years ago, 2-May-01, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Proposal
|
|
(...) Erg. The .DAT extension is pretty much needed by all tools in use. And the original tools are still used quite a bit, especially in cases where tool flexability is more important than a GUI. (i.e. I still use LEdit to model tank treads, since (...) (23 years ago, 2-May-01, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Proposal
|
|
(...) I think you could use .mpd Many of the tools already accept this extension, and I believe (correct me if I am wrong someone) that you can rename your model files, and any model files you download, to use this extension. Of course parts and (...) (23 years ago, 2-May-01, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Proposal
|
|
I've got a bit of a problem with the LDraw derived software. I love the tools I use. My problem is with the unfortunate choice of filename extension. When LDraw/LEdit were written, it didn't really matter much. However, nowadays file (...) (23 years ago, 2-May-01, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Unofficial Update Progress
|
|
(...) Argh, I remembered about those, and still didn't kill the old files. Thanks for pointing this out. Steve (23 years ago, 2-May-01, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Parts Tracker Developers Wanted
|
|
(...) Actually, much of the functionality is in the prototype. The major missing pieces are: 1. Unofficial/ad-hoc part downloading 2. Release packaging 3. Administrator override of author/reviewer functions (ie, the admin can perform any function) (...) (23 years ago, 2-May-01, to lugnet.cad.dev, lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: Unofficial Update Progress
|
|
(...) Watch out here, Franklin submitted the SW heads twice, once without the P and a three digit pattern number, then he resent them with the two letter pattern code. Maybe the non-P parts should be ignored? Dan (23 years ago, 2-May-01, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Parts Tracker Developers Wanted
|
|
I got a question in email, and I thought the answer would be of general interest. The question: (...) The answer: In short, very loose form, the main workflow is: Process 1: Author uploads file -> Reviewers check out file -> Reviewers check/certify (...) (23 years ago, 2-May-01, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Unofficial Update Progress
|
|
Bravo! -Chuck (23 years ago, 2-May-01, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Unofficial Update Progress
|
|
I am working on an 'unofficial update' page. Just to have a handle for it, I'm labeling it 'update 2001-01', although after update 2001-02, the unofficial update will go away, cease to exist, become as though it never was. Some things that I am (...) (23 years ago, 2-May-01, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
