 | | Re: LSC Proposal 0.99
|
|
(...) I see your points and agree with 2 and 3, but only partially with 1. Anyways, there's about equal response for or against limitations. Not totally sure on what to do - I'll let it simmer for a bit. (I should note that if there was no (...) (21 years ago, 13-May-03, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: Elections and Membership in ldraw.org
|
|
(...) I'd much rather have one reasonably decent method, then several different methods. Steve (21 years ago, 10-May-03, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: LSC Proposal 0.99
|
|
(...) You must not go to the same places I do for vacation. Public terminals? Not where I've been. OTOH, if we're going to play the vacation game, some people go for longer than 2 weeks. Heck, some people are basically offline all summer. I'd say a (...) (21 years ago, 10-May-03, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: LSC Proposal 0.99
|
|
(...) I feel voting for LSC members should be open to the general group. I've got 2 reasons for this: 1. I trust people enough that they'll deal with their own capabilities for discernment in this area. 2. I don't want to have to sort out who gets (...) (21 years ago, 10-May-03, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: Renaming Gaming group
|
|
(...) Sure (...) It's easier to move 2 or 3 groups at once than separately. . . . what remapping would you suggest? --Todd (21 years ago, 10-May-03, to lugnet.admin.nntp, lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: Renaming Gaming group
|
|
(...) Very cool! Any chance you'd consider moving lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw to lugnet.cad.org.ldraw? I realize it's only 4 characters, but making this change would: a. Align the ldraw group with other <topic>.org groups. b. Get the LDraw.org group (...) (21 years ago, 10-May-03, to lugnet.admin.nntp, lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: Parts Tracker Status
|
|
(...) Just as a note, if you don't have root access, you should be still able to compile and use the Mesa libraries purely from your account. This might take a little know-how, and you'll have to set LD_LIBRARY_PATH to include whatever directory you (...) (21 years ago, 9-May-03, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: Parts Tracker Status
|
|
(...) Just so I don't lose it, here's a link to someone who apparently has had some success with this technique building OSMesa without X on an ipaq. The --without-x looks like a handy build option. (URL) I've put it on my todo list to put together (...) (21 years ago, 9-May-03, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: Parts Tracker Status
|
|
(...) I'm pretty sure I've run it without the X libraries around, but I don't think I ever linked it without them. So you might be able to build it on another BSD box with X and MESA and then run it on a headless box with just the OSMesa lib (...) (21 years ago, 9-May-03, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: Parts Tracker Status
|
|
(...) well, the problem is that we don't have the MESA libraries installed, and it's going to be a problem setting them up on the server. We are working to have the pictures generated in semi-real time off the server though. Unless you can somehow (...) (21 years ago, 9-May-03, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: Parts Tracker Status
|
|
(...) Do you need help getting the image generation running? It should work on BSD. Don (21 years ago, 9-May-03, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: The dead Parts Tracker (was: Problem with account)
|
|
Steve Bliss <steve.bliss@earthlink.net> schrieb im Newsbeitrag news:HELE4v.3n6@lugnet.com... (...) Great! Thanks! You done it, after weeks. The tracker is online again. Thanks again Bernd (21 years ago, 9-May-03, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: The dead Parts Tracker (was: Problem with account)
|
|
It's not dead yet! It's feeling better... (...) As of about half an hour ago. :) Well, mostly. (...) Mostly technical difficulties, and some availability issues. Steve (21 years ago, 8-May-03, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: Parts Tracker Status
|
|
Thanks, Steve!! -Tim (...) (21 years ago, 8-May-03, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Parts Tracker Status
|
|
The Parts Tracker is back online and open for business! The URL is the same as always, (URL). There are two outstanding issues that we'll hopefully be able to resolve soon: 1. Because of differences in the nature of the server, submissions and (...) (21 years ago, 8-May-03, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw) !!
|
| |
| | Re: Elections and Membership in ldraw.org
|
|
(...) Yup! Soon! Not _exactly_ the way we brainstormed about it, but effectively the same result, I think. I don't think we'll go back automatically and retroactively convert news-posting accounts, for example. I think there'll be a transition (...) (21 years ago, 8-May-03, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw, lugnet.admin.general)
|
| |
| | The dead Parts Tracker (was: Problem with account)
|
|
Do you guys have an estimate on when this will be working again? Is this an issue of technical difficulties, or are we waiting for someone to get back from vacation? And yes, I know this is all volunteer work. I greatly appreciate having this great (...) (21 years ago, 8-May-03, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: LSC Proposal 0.99
|
|
(...) I would be one of those who would be prevented from voting (at least this year), and I don't have a strong objection to not being able to vote. The restriction is designed to make the LSC a technical group voted on by technically involved (...) (21 years ago, 8-May-03, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: LSC Proposal 0.99
|
|
(...) I personally feel the restriction is a good idea. However, playing devil's advocate, I feel obliged to point out that since it would increase my voting power (since I am eligible as a software author), it's in my best interests to be in favor (...) (21 years ago, 8-May-03, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: motm/sotm
|
|
(...) I agree somewhat, but I think it's better than having no contest in the mean time. -Tim (21 years ago, 8-May-03, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: motm/sotm
|
|
(...) We _could_. But it would limit participation in the vote more than I would like. Play well, Jacob -- LEGO boats: (URL) (21 years ago, 8-May-03, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: motm/sotm
|
|
(...) I'd have to check with Terry and Steve, but I think it's a backup issue. I wonder if in the mean time, we couldn't run MOTM via LUGNET's poll system? -Tim (21 years ago, 8-May-03, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | motm/sotm
|
|
Hi, With all the problems ldraw.org has had over the last few weeks, what happened with March's contests? The site is still showing February's winners. <disclosure> I'm asking mainly because I had an image entered and the suspense is killing me (...) (21 years ago, 8-May-03, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: LSC Proposal 0.99
|
|
(...) UTC of course! ;-) Play well, Jacob (21 years ago, 7-May-03, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: LSC Proposal 0.99
|
|
(...) I dunno - that depends on the tech guys who create the voting system. GMT or EST (New York) sounds good to me. -Tim (21 years ago, 7-May-03, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: LSC Proposal 0.99
|
|
(...) 5 days sounds good ... which time-zone are we talkin' about, Tokyo, Servertime in DK, GMT, NY or LA ;-)? w. (GMT +01:00) (21 years ago, 7-May-03, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: LSC Proposal 0.99
|
|
(...) there are reasons why I put stress on a restriction. (URL) took me almost a year to get a deeper understanding of the stuff I was dealing with and feel comfortable with cond. line, BFC, bad vertex sequences and the like. 'til one hasn't (...) (21 years ago, 7-May-03, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: LSC Proposal 0.99
|
|
(...) Great, thanks! Ultimately, the means of communication should be up to the elected LSC members to decide for themselves. If I had my say, I like the idea of a mailing list on LDraw.org, which posts messages automatically to a LUGNET group for (...) (21 years ago, 7-May-03, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: LSC Proposal 0.99
|
|
(...) Hi Tim, Give me a hollar if you would like a special group for this on LUGNET. If you have a list (either static or dynamic) of email addresses whom you want to grant posting access, it would be fairly easy for me to set things on LUGNET such (...) (21 years ago, 7-May-03, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: LSC Proposal 0.99
|
|
(...) I like 5 days. Start the votes on Wednesday and end on Sunday. As far a people on vacation, the vote is the same time every year and there are enough public terminals to facilitate voting -Orion (21 years ago, 6-May-03, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: LSC Proposal 0.99
|
|
(...) I agree with Tim and have no objection to vote limitation. -Orion (21 years ago, 6-May-03, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: LSC Proposal 0.99
|
|
Here's an idea: treat it like Model-of-the-month. Have the candidates draw themselves up in .LDR format and submit the files... (...) (21 years ago, 6-May-03, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: LSC Proposal 0.99
|
|
(...) A week sounds good. I'd even go 10 days maybe, including two weekends (believe it or not,people go on vacation in the summer and not all of them are deranged like me and take their laptops with them and check email and LUGNET each day (...) (21 years ago, 6-May-03, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: LSC Proposal 0.99
|
|
(...) I'm tempted to say a week - 3 days would miss people that can only deal with such stuff on weekends, or weekdays... Dan (21 years ago, 6-May-03, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: LSC Proposal 0.99
|
|
(...) This needs to be changed - voting should be open for longer than one day, to give everyone the opportunity to vote. What do people think? I think it should be open 5 days or less, probably something like 3. Thoughts? -Tim (21 years ago, 6-May-03, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: LSC Proposal 0.99
|
|
(...) I've been thinking about this and I think I mildly favor LSC elections open to all ldraw.org members. But I waver on it. (21 years ago, 6-May-03, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: LSC Proposal 0.99
|
|
(...) Ok :-) (...) Cool. Anyone else care to add their .02? -Tim (21 years ago, 6-May-03, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: Elections and Membership in ldraw.org
|
|
(...) ...on the technical end of things, I think we should get a voting and membership system in place. Once that has been taken care of and tested, open up membership for the purpose of electing the first LSC. -Tim (21 years ago, 6-May-03, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: LSC Proposal 0.99
|
|
(...) I'm actually half and half on it. I do see reasons why to limit it, but for some reason I'm a little wary of accepting it without discussion. (...) Well, at least I haven't noticed it before, otherwise I would have probably mentioned it. But (...) (21 years ago, 6-May-03, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: Elections and Membership in ldraw.org
|
|
(...) great! So what's the next step? Dan (21 years ago, 6-May-03, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
