Subject:
|
Issue with some of the holds on the Parts Tracker
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.cad.dev
|
Date:
|
Tue, 11 Jun 2002 16:37:54 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
418 times
|
| |
|
|
I am at issue with some the hold votes that have given to parts on the PT.
As the certify statement says, a part is certified if it is good for general
release. In other words, we're not looking for absolute perfection, we are
looking for a part that is good to use and conforms to the guidelines set
forth by the documents in the PT Reference. It took me a little bit shift
from the perfectionist mentality as well. Here are a couple examples of
what I am talking about:
-Holding a non-BFC part simply because it has bad vertex sequences. While
this may be bad coding form, a certify vote and a warning would suffice
-*Very* small quad overlaps/gaps in patterned pieces that only show up in
deep zooming. Will errors like this ever really be seen?
In the end, I think that a certain amount of nitpickiness is good but let's
try not to take it overboard. The only result that can come from being
overcritical is that we alienate the part authors and deprive us the parts
in the future
-Orion
(make it billthefish and remove the obvious lettering to reply personally)
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
 | | Re: Issue with some of the holds on the Parts Tracker
|
| Hello Orion, I think you may refer to some hold votes i did today. (...) I would never hold a part because of some bad vertex sequences only. But identical lines are a reason for doing this. Refer to the parts tracker documentation for L3P-error (...) (22 years ago, 11-Jun-02, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
5 Messages in This Thread:
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
