 | | Re: Parts Maintenance Idea
|
|
Steve Bliss (blisses@worldnet.att.net) wrote: [ about adding maintenance information to the parts files ] (...) I think it is a good idea. Information about which names the file has had in the past will be useful for updating old models, and the (...) (26 years ago, 11-Feb-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Proposal for Revised Memorial
|
|
[ Moving to lugnet.publish ] (...) Apache: <URL:(URL) (...) I can't remember the details, but basically you just create a catalog for the new server and add a few lines to one of the configuration files that informs Apache of the relation between (...) (26 years ago, 11-Feb-99, to lugnet.cad.dev, lugnet.publish)
|
| |
| | Re: News-by-Mail digests
|
|
(...) Mainly that I all of a sudden got flooded with ANOTHER pile of Emails when this was started up. I don't mind the CONTENT, but I prefer it in Digest form. I get anything I can in Digest form, unless it is something that I NEED realtime. (...) (...) (26 years ago, 11-Feb-99, to lugnet.admin.general, lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: News-by-Mail digests
|
|
[whoops, this time the Followup-To field is actually set to lugnet.admin.general; I forgot to do that last time.] (...) OK. People receiving duplicates won't disrupt the ng's any, so if duplicate messages aren't annoying to you, then they're not a (...) (26 years ago, 11-Feb-99, to lugnet.cad.dev, lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | Re: News-by-Mail digests
|
|
(...) I'd much prefer them on a per-group basis, even if it means some duplicates across several Digests. (...) I know of no client at all that can handle Digests in the way you want. It is up to the Digest owner to modify the Digest output to do (...) (26 years ago, 11-Feb-99, to lugnet.cad.dev, lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | News-by-Mail digests
|
|
[Crossposted from lugnet.cad.dev; followups set to lugnet.admin.general] (...) glasnapd@db.erau.edu (Doug Glasnapp) writes: (...) Questions: Are any general-purpose (and free) mailing list services out there anywhere on the net which spool up (...) (26 years ago, 11-Feb-99, to lugnet.cad.dev, lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | Re: Non-TLG Parts
|
|
(...) Um, I wouldn't object either, as long as it is off-site and clearly marked as unofficial clone parts. We don't need to see "Keep Ldraw Pure" buttons popping up on people's sites.. ;) Keep Building!! -Tim <>< (URL) timcourtne ICQ: 23951114 New (...) (26 years ago, 11-Feb-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Non-TLG Parts
|
|
(...) Only when the competition is (a) competent and (b) putting out superior or nearly superior stuff. If the competition puts out junk, is that an incentive to improve? Early LEGO Town and Castle sets were incredible, for example, and TLG created (...) (26 years ago, 11-Feb-99, to lugnet.cad.dev, lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Non-TLG Parts
|
|
(...) I agree with that. I would have no objections to linking to custom sites for non-lego parts. The more the merrier. I just think that LDraw should remain just that. Not MBDraw or TDraw. :-) -- Terry K -- (26 years ago, 11-Feb-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
| |
| | Re: Non-TLG Parts
|
|
(...) I think that was Linc (?) But he did that to represent TLG rubber bands, much the same as others have done to represent hoses. So that wasn't a case of "non-TLG" pieces. As far as message size goes, yes it does inflate things a bit, as do (...) (26 years ago, 11-Feb-99, to lugnet.cad.dev)
|
