|
 | | Re: License revision 1
|
| "Steve Bliss" <steve.bliss@home.com> wrote in message news:kuph3tcm65ren3n...4ax.com... (...) bit (...) panel (...) Hehe.. Well given the nature of LCAD, its pretty difficult to select who is going to lead. But on the other side, having a panel of (...) (24 years ago, 14-Dec-00, to lugnet.cad.dev)
| |
|  
ldraw
(score: 0.218)
|
|
| |
|
ldraw
(score: 0.218)
|
|
| | Re: License revision 1
|
| First, koen, I am the one who asked. I would like to package leocad for Debian GNU/Linux, and I cannot [legally] distribute the ldraw parts library with it unless it contains an acceptable license. (...) Why? Say Internet explorer had some sort of (...) (24 years ago, 13-Dec-00, to lugnet.cad.dev)
| |
|
ldraw
(score: 0.218)
|
|
| | Re: License revision 1
|
| (...) I only added that because other people requested, I was happy with the initial license. Personally I think that #4 is going to scare people away. (...) It's better, english is not my native language. (...) Ok, it seems that a lot of people (...) (24 years ago, 14-Dec-00, to lugnet.cad.dev)
| |
|
ldraw
(score: 0.218)
|
|
| | Re: License - again
|
| "Frank Filz" <ffilz@mindspring.com> wrote in message news:3A36D1B3.4287@m...ing.com... (...) This is the perfect example of the line we should draw with regard to converters. There are two main tools which convert an LDraw model to POV-Ray: L2P and (...) (24 years ago, 13-Dec-00, to lugnet.cad.dev)
| |
|
ldraw
(score: 0.218)
|
|
| | Re: Idea for ldraw.org page
|
| "John VanZwieten" <john_vanzwieten@email.msn.com> wrote in message news:G57CyH.Bt0@lugnet.com... (...) That's a cool idea :-) I've been thinking of some things that can be done with the site recently, given that there is something in the works for (...) (24 years ago, 7-Dec-00, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
| |
|
ldraw
(score: 0.218)
|
|
| | Re: License - again
|
| (...) BTW, you're talking about the "contributor's agreement" here, not a user or distribution license. I agree completely. My ideal "contributor's agreement" would be to act like each contributed work existed as two independent entities, which had (...) (24 years ago, 13-Dec-00, to lugnet.cad.dev)
| |
|
ldraw
(score: 0.218)
|
|
| | Re: License revision 1
|
| (...) Seconding Pat Mahoney's questions directed at parts 4 and 5. My own questions: On part 4: I understand the main need for the license is: packaging the parts library with an application for distribution. Question: is the license meant to impose (...) (24 years ago, 14-Dec-00, to lugnet.cad.dev)
| |
|
ldraw
(score: 0.218)
|
|
| | Re: Idea for ldraw.org page
|
| "Steve Bliss" <steve.bliss@home.com> wrote in message news:p7823tk77ekkdde...4ax.com... (...) page, (...) there (...) Maybe for 1/3 or 1/2 a point. Unless it was a total redo. Revisions are certainly an important contribution to the community (and (...) (24 years ago, 8-Dec-00, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
| |
|
ldraw
(score: 0.218)
|
|
| | Re: License - again
|
| (...) Sometimes it's scary how in agreement we are... (...) A differentiation which I think would also be valuable to make is a differentiation between any sort of converter program which uses the definition of the parts in the library to create an (...) (24 years ago, 12-Dec-00, to lugnet.cad.dev)
| |
|
ldraw
(score: 0.218)
|
|
| | Re: License revision 1
|
| "Steve Bliss" <steve.bliss@home.com> wrote in message news:lpff3tspjvsl3iu...4ax.com... (...) Agreed. (...) Good point - up until recently I have been against LCAD derivative software for sale, but some of the points made here has changed my (...) (24 years ago, 13-Dec-00, to lugnet.cad.dev)
| |
|
ldraw
(score: 0.218)
|
|
| | Re: License revision 1
|
| (...) I like where you're going, mostly. (...) I'd like to not have different terms for commercial and non-commercial applications. I don't see a valid reason for discriminating on the basis of cost. My thinking is this: most LCAD'ish things are (...) (24 years ago, 13-Dec-00, to lugnet.cad.dev)
| |
|
ldraw
(score: 0.218)
|
|
| | Idea for ldraw.org page
|
| How about recognizing, either on the front page, or on the download page, the most prolific part authors per vote or per year. It seems like there are usually 3-4 authors at any given time who really carry the load for creating new parts, and it (...) (24 years ago, 7-Dec-00, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
| |
|
ldraw
(score: 0.218)
|
|
| | Re: License - again
|
| I like the artistic license, but not for a library of parts. The key issue to deal with in the LCAD library is "abandonment". The license must allow active LCAD people to maintain, modify, convert and distribute parts that people author. The (...) (24 years ago, 13-Dec-00, to lugnet.cad.dev)
| |
|
ldraw
(score: 0.218)
|
|
| | Re: License - again
|
| (...) I've written some thoughts further down in this thread, but what I know about license details I'll write here (but hasn't this been gone over before?) GPL infects derivative works. LGPL need not. If you want to prohibit commercialization, take (...) (24 years ago, 12-Dec-00, to lugnet.cad.dev)
| |
|
ldraw
(score: 0.218)
|
|
| | Re: License - again
|
| (...) Right. And that's my problem with GPL in a nutshell. It leaks into stuff. Now, we've reasonably outlined how the parts license doesn't leak into stuff like published designs, renderings, instruction sets, etc. But if licensing the parts (...) (24 years ago, 12-Dec-00, to lugnet.cad.dev)
| |
|
ldraw
(score: 0.218)
|
|
| | Re: License - again
|
| (...) Right, but that's an implied understanding, not an explicit agreement. Basically, there should be a "part submission" page on ldraw.org. One of the features of that page should be a link to a full contributor's agreement. Another necessary (...) (24 years ago, 6-Dec-00, to lugnet.cad.dev)
| |
|
ldraw
(score: 0.218)
|
|
| |
|
ldraw
(score: 0.218)
|
|
| | Re: License - again
|
| I hear you clearly now Larry. However, on reflection, I still think the cost of providing a ldraw import ability into CREATOR II (Son of Creator – or is that blasphemy?) will be more than the benefits it would supply to the _public_. You have to (...) (24 years ago, 6-Dec-00, to lugnet.cad.dev)
| |
|
ldraw
(score: 0.218)
|
|
| | Re: *** The best LEGO CAD software ? ***
|
| norbert grellneth skrev i meddelandet ... (...) All of them :-)) (...) BlockCAD. (...) LDRAW - (URL) by James Jessiman is _the_ program which sets the standard. This has a very large assortment of pieces. It's a bit tedious to create models though. (...) (24 years ago, 19-Nov-00, to lugnet.cad, lugnet.cad.dev)
| |
|
ldraw
(score: 0.218)
|
