|
 | | Re: License Intent
|
| (...) [snip] (...) I read the exact same clause and come to exactly the opposite conclusion. My reasoning is that because linking is something you do to code, not LDraw parts; the clause has no bearing to LDraw parts. Is my interpretation right, or (...) (20 years ago, 12-Jun-04, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
| |
|  
ldraw
(score: 0.795)
|
|
| | Re: Baseplate generator program
|
| (...) I think that it's a good idea. There is a built-in part genereator in SimLego too, but the parts it generates are far from today's LCad standards, and the SimLego source code is forever lost. A third way to go would be to write an LDraw Script (...) (20 years ago, 27-May-04, to lugnet.cad.dev)
| |
|
ldraw
(score: 0.795)
|
|
| | Baseplate generator program
|
| I am developing a building in MLCAD (which I have built). I intend to including an interior and may use cut (Gasp!!) baseplates for floors. Since the parts library did not include non-standard baseplates (like 22x12) I wrote a small program that (...) (20 years ago, 26-May-04, to lugnet.cad.dev)
| |
|
ldraw
(score: 0.795)
|
|
| | Re: License Intent
|
| What follows is my personal reply not offical position of SteerCo. (...) I agree. We missed this goal, and it is indeed important. (...) True. And sort of false. Sometimes (take the change in the 9V train wheelset recently) there is a need to have (...) (20 years ago, 28-May-04, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw, FTX)
| |
|
ldraw
(score: 0.795)
|
|
| |
|
ldraw
(score: 0.795)
|
|
| |
|
ldraw
(score: 0.795)
|
|
| |
|
ldraw
(score: 0.795)
|
|
| | Re: License Intent
|
| (...) <blink> How is the second item (a) a "protection" and (b) required by "the fundamental goals of Ldraw.org"? I would observe that Linux and the GNU Project seem to have done fine, despite frequent commercial redistribution for a charge (by Red (...) (20 years ago, 4-Jun-04, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
| |
|
ldraw
(score: 0.795)
|
|
| |
|
ldraw
(score: 0.795)
|
|
| |
|
ldraw
(score: 0.795)
|
|
| |
|
ldraw
(score: 0.795)
|
|
| |
|
ldraw
(score: 0.795)
|
|
| |
|
ldraw
(score: 0.795)
|
|
| |
|
ldraw
(score: 0.795)
|
|
| | Re: License Intent
|
| FTX and me are not getting along tonite. In the interests of not having words disappear I am posting this in plain text. Apologies for the dups and cancels. In lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw, Larry Pieniazek wrote: In lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw, Larry (...) (20 years ago, 2-Jun-04, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
| |
|
ldraw
(score: 0.795)
|
|
| | Re: License Intent
|
| (...) (personal thoughts) I think your suggestion could work. I'm very wary of requiring absolute explicit permission for any future changes, though I do want to ensure the authors' wishes are considered in potential future changes. The reason is, (...) (20 years ago, 4-Jun-04, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
| |
|
ldraw
(score: 0.795)
|
|
| | Color Defining Systems Summary?
|
| I think that there are a number of different systems for defining new or custom colors in the large number of LCad programs, right? Most of them are considerate towards original LDraw and other tools that are not supporting that system. But I think (...) (20 years ago, 4-Jun-04, to lugnet.cad.dev)
| |
|
ldraw
(score: 0.795)
|
|
| |
|
ldraw
(score: 0.795)
|
|
| | Re: License Intent
|
| (...) I think I disagree here. One of the problems we have right now is when we implement the license, we will have to explicitly seek each author's approval. Some authors will be unreachable, which means we won't be able to gain their perimssion to (...) (20 years ago, 2-Jun-04, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
| |
|
ldraw
(score: 0.795)
|
|
| |
|
ldraw
(score: 0.795)
|
