 | | Re: Use of arbitrary elements with LSynth
|
|
(...) Sorry, not intending to shame you. You are looking in the right place, but I'm a neophyte on source forge. Don, what have I failed to do? Thanks, Kevin (21 years ago, 22-Apr-03, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Use of arbitrary elements with LSynth
|
|
(...) Ya. I have made good use of LSynth for hoses and for rubber bands in my current project and found it easy to use so I'm definitely interested in using it!!!! (...) OK, well maybe you've shamed me into taking a look. I just went to sourceforge (...) (21 years ago, 22-Apr-03, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Use of arbitrary elements with LSynth
|
|
(...) If I recall, it was Kevin's lack of time that prompted him to open up the lsynth code and solicit your help. (I think he may have mentioned you specifically ;) Also, I imagine you could argue that contributing to lsynth satisfies requirement 3 (...) (21 years ago, 22-Apr-03, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Use of arbitrary elements with LSynth
|
|
(...) flex (...) I assume the lack of interest is in the coding, not the using :^) I have a similar lack of time. Kevin (...) (21 years ago, 22-Apr-03, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: LDraw.org Standards Committee (LSC) Draft Proposal
|
|
(...) That was the intent of the minimum requirements. I'd like this to be as open as possible too, without risking the integrity and competency of the decision making body by allowing someone to walk in off the street and get in. (...) Yep. I'm (...) (21 years ago, 22-Apr-03, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Use of arbitrary elements with LSynth
|
|
(...) Except for time/skill/interest. (mostly time) (...) I'm thinking that just allowing for a level of indirection might do the trick. If you added a way to just specify what part you wanted used for the stringing together, and allowed it to be (...) (21 years ago, 22-Apr-03, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: LDraw.org Standards Committee (LSC) Draft Proposal
|
|
(...) I agree that the slots should be open to everyone but I'd like to weed out those who are the "rainy day" LDrawers. In other words, you need to have proven your competency and commitment. We could go on and on about what qualification someone (...) (21 years ago, 22-Apr-03, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: LDraw.org Standards Committee (LSC) Draft Proposal
|
|
(...) Right. The proposal is set up in such a way to encourage everyone - programmer or not - to discuss the issues publicly. When it comes to making decisions, a limited group of qualified people (in this case, programmers, parts authors, or (...) (21 years ago, 22-Apr-03, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: LDraw.org Standards Committee (LSC) Draft Proposal
|
|
(...) I agree, 100%. I think we should have more representation from the programming side of the community. :) Dan (21 years ago, 22-Apr-03, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: LDraw.org Standards Committee (LSC) Draft Proposal
|
|
I'm going to snip out the stuff I'm not going to comment on (...) I like this distiction. Now we can concentrate on forging a new path without having to worry about legacy DOS programs (...) I like this idea of having qualified members. You are (...) (21 years ago, 22-Apr-03, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
