 | | Re: Legacy Files on the Parts Tracker
|
|
(...) No, that's a very good point. You're correct, that the subparts have to be certified first. I was really trying to advocate changing just the sort order of the parts tracker list (so that parts at the bottom of the page don't get ignored), not (...) (21 years ago, 8-Oct-03, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: Legacy Files on the Parts Tracker
|
|
(...) Shouldn't subfiles sort *before* any part that actually uses them? Ie. no use certifying the part unless the subfiles are done first. -- Anders Isaksson, Sweden BlockCAD: (2 URLs) (21 years ago, 7-Oct-03, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Bugs with the Parts Tracker
|
|
[emphasis Franklin's] (...) Here's a good example of why the current nomenclature is messed up (in my humble, yet aggressively vociferous, opinion). (URL) new file does not -- repeat ***NOT*** -- need any unofficial parts, and yet it says (...) (21 years ago, 7-Oct-03, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: Legacy Files on the Parts Tracker
|
|
(...) There may be merit in somehow boosting the position of the subfiles themselves in the list (if it's true that people only work on the highest listed items and ignore the bottom stuff... I know it's true for me). Perhaps the more parts use an (...) (21 years ago, 7-Oct-03, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: Legacy Files on the Parts Tracker
|
|
(...) FWIW, I agree with this. Though I am a parts reviewer, I don't have a terribly extensive collection of pieces to compare the LDraw ones with. And the Real World doesn't leave much time to review parts! --Ryan (explaining his credentials to (...) (21 years ago, 6-Oct-03, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
