|
 | | Re: Parts license
|
| (...) I'd definitely be somewhat concerned about a license which restricted the parts from being used with non-free programs. I'd hate to preclude the possibility of a really awesome commercial program being forced to re-invent the wheel, and (...) (24 years ago, 18-Sep-00, to lugnet.cad.dev)
| |
|  
ldraw
(score: 0.210)
|
|
| | Re: Parts license
|
| (...) They're different. Paid up means that even if a fee is instituted at some point, the current license holders are covered. No charge doesn't carry that meaning. Paid up is a special term used in this sort of gobbledegook. (...) Yes. One is (...) (24 years ago, 22-Sep-00, to lugnet.cad.dev)
| |
|
ldraw
(score: 0.210)
|
|
| | Re: ZNAP newsgroup
|
| (...) Yup: lugnet.znap <=> (URL) Also is the a ZNAP partserf? LEGO ZNAP is real LEGO, so I would imagine eventually someday someone will model the ZNAP parts for LDraw and they would become part of the Partsref? --Todd (24 years ago, 21-Sep-00, to lugnet.general, lugnet.znap, lugnet.cad.dev)
| |
|
ldraw
(score: 0.210)
|
|
| | Re: Parts license
|
| Have you covered the case where a parts author submits a new part for review, but because of errors the part is rejected? I think you should still have ldraw.org retain rights to modify and distribute, so that someone else could clean up the file (...) (24 years ago, 21-Sep-00, to lugnet.cad.dev)
| |
|
ldraw
(score: 0.210)
|
|
| | Re: Parts license
|
| (...) Can we c/paid up/no-charge/? And is there a significant difference between "unrevokable" and non-revokable? (...) Hmm. I can see a few different ways that 'commercial programs' would 'use' the library: 1. They would read the files in order to (...) (24 years ago, 21-Sep-00, to lugnet.cad.dev)
| |
|
ldraw
(score: 0.210)
|
|
| |
|
ldraw
(score: 0.209)
|
|
| | Re: Parts license
|
| (...) I only converted the original library to another format because it gives a much faster rendering and James didn't want other people to redistribute the files in the original format, he wanted to have people download files from his page (...) (24 years ago, 21-Sep-00, to lugnet.cad.dev)
| |
|
ldraw
(score: 0.209)
|
|
| | Re: Parts license
|
| (...) A lot of licenses work that way. Maybe I used the word "publish" wrong, I want to make sure that if someone fixes a bug in a part, he's forced to send his fixes to ldraw.org and allow everyone to use them. (...) That's the case of LeoCAD and (...) (24 years ago, 20-Sep-00, to lugnet.cad.dev)
| |
|
ldraw
(score: 0.209)
|
|
| | Parts license
|
| I'd like to propose an official license for the LDraw parts, I think this is something that has been mentioned before but we didn't get very far in the past. This is important now that there are plans to create am LDraw CD-ROM and I need this (...) (24 years ago, 17-Sep-00, to lugnet.cad.dev) !
| |
|
ldraw
(score: 0.209)
|
|
| | Re: "Needs Work"- Needs Work
|
| (...) I am happy to incorporate / edit the existing text, and now I can see (URL) and the pages it links to, but these are some missing HTML end tags. Internet Explorer (4.0) can cope with these, but Netscape (4.08) cannot and just displays the raw (...) (24 years ago, 19-Sep-00, to lugnet.cad.dev)
| |
|
ldraw
(score: 0.209)
|
|
| | Test version of LDraw Add-On Installation
|
| I've finally put together an installation package for LDAO that should be safe. But it needs some more testing, before I publish it generally. Would someone be willing to try this out, and verify that it works? The test copy is at: (URL) Just (...) (24 years ago, 15-Sep-00, to lugnet.cad.dev)
| |
|
ldraw
(score: 0.209)
|
|
| | Re: Parts license
|
| (...) It was a bad idea, please ignore that paragraph. (...) Ok, any lawyers around ? Anyone wants to write a license with all of that fancy legal stuff ? (...) The important thing for the parts is to keep them free to use and people who improve the (...) (24 years ago, 18-Sep-00, to lugnet.cad.dev)
| |
|
ldraw
(score: 0.209)
|
|
| | Re: Parts license
|
| (...) One thing I forgot to add -- In the spirit of open content, I think that any license that comes about ought to at least require that the republisher of the data must give a link to www.ldraw.org so that anyone using the parts or any (...) (24 years ago, 18-Sep-00, to lugnet.cad.dev)
| |
|
ldraw
(score: 0.209)
|
|
| | Re: unofficial new primitive -- "Rounded Corner"
|
| (...) Yes, thanks to your message with explanatory image. :-) Please consider giving that to whomever is in charge of maintaining the L-CAD FAQ at ldraw.org. (...) Using Steve's sugggestion as well, I'll call it "1-8sphc.dat". I've also inserted (...) (24 years ago, 15-Sep-00, to lugnet.cad.dev)
| |
|
ldraw
(score: 0.209)
|
|
| | Re: unofficial new primitive -- "Rounded Corner"
|
| (...) Good suggestion. Except without the second dash, please. Could you make the title be: 1/8 Sphere Cut Off And add some comment lines, something like: 0 This figure is a sphere (radius 2^.5) intersected with a 0 standard-sized LDraw box (see (...) (24 years ago, 15-Sep-00, to lugnet.cad.dev)
| |
|
ldraw
(score: 0.209)
|
|
| | parts available?
|
| hello i was thinking about doing my technic set up in mlcad...but i dont want to put that kind of effort into it if all the parts arent available so, my question is this do you know if all the parts are available for ldraw and mlcad for the (...) (24 years ago, 14-Sep-00, to lugnet.cad.mlcad, lugnet.cad, lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
| |
|
ldraw
(score: 0.209)
|
|
| |
|
ldraw
(score: 0.209)
|
|
| |
|
ldraw
(score: 0.209)
|
|
| | Re: Sphere tesselation
|
| (...) As far as I know, the sphere is incorrectly tesselated in Ldraw, because it has non-planar quads. So if there is ever going to be a matematical tesselation, which aproaches this form, it won't surelly be a sphere, more like "spheroid", similar (...) (24 years ago, 11-Sep-00, to lugnet.cad.dev)
| |
|
ldraw
(score: 0.209)
|
|
| |
|
ldraw
(score: 0.208)
|
