 | | Re: Voting now open for July's MOTM and SOTM contests
|
|
(...) Oops, thanks. I fixed it. -Orion (20 years ago, 8-Jul-04, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Voting now open for July's MOTM and SOTM contests
|
|
(...) Cool beans, Orion. FYI - I think you inserted the wrong title on one of the SOTM images. 'Atomium' appears twice -- on two different scenes. -Tim (20 years ago, 8-Jul-04, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw, FTX)
|
| |
| | Voting now open for July's MOTM and SOTM contests
|
|
The voting for the July Model of the Month and Scene of the Month contests is now open at LDraw.org. Visit the (URL) voting page> to cast your vote. I apologize again for the cancellation of last month's contest. -Orion (20 years ago, 8-Jul-04, to lugnet.cad, lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw, lugnet.announce, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: LDraw.org Celebrates 5 Years!
|
|
(...) Youngster! How about another 50 years! All kidding aside, congratulations and thanks to the community, who have made this milestone possible. (20 years ago, 8-Jul-04, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | LDraw.org Celebrates 5 Years!
|
|
LDraw.org celebrates five years of being online today. The project began in early 1999 and launched to the public on July 7 of that year, almost two years after James Jessiman passed away. Since then, both the site and the community have grown leaps (...) (20 years ago, 8-Jul-04, to lugnet.announce, lugnet.cad, lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw, lugnet.org, lugnet.publish) !
|
| |
| | Numbers Report - 5 July 2004
|
|
Stats for Unofficial Files 169 certified files. 141 files need admin review. 460 files need more votes. 440 have uncertified subfiles. 212 held files. Total Files: 1,422 Comparison with Prev. Report: 2004-07-05: 169 / 141 / 460 / 440 / 212 (1,422) (...) (20 years ago, 5-Jul-04, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | 2nd LSC: Call for Nominations
|
|
It has been a full year since the creation of the LDraw.org Standards Committee (LSC). Nominations are now open, elections will be held July 15. The LDraw.org Standards Committee (LSC) is responsible for maintaining semi-regular internal discussions (...) (20 years ago, 2-Jul-04, to lugnet.announce, lugnet.cad, lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw, FTX) !!
|
| |
| | Parts Tracker Page Style Updated
|
|
I've (finally) gone through the Parts Tracker pages, and updated the style to more closely resemble the page layout on the rest of ldraw.org. Please let me know if you find something I missed - or messed up! (URL) (20 years ago, 28-Jun-04, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | June MOTM/SOTM Update
|
|
Due to my work schedule and my visit to California for my brother's high school graduation, I couldn't find the time to properly setup the June MOTM/SOTM. Instead of doing a shoddy job, I'm going to cancel the June contests. I apologize for this and (...) (20 years ago, 15-Jun-04, to lugnet.cad, lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: License Intent
|
|
(...) I don't know. I think when something is statically linked you can recover the original code with a disassembler. It's really still there in a different form. There's no way to disassemble a picture into the ldraw code without using the ldraw (...) (20 years ago, 13-Jun-04, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: License Intent
|
|
Just for the record: IANAL (...) Mine. LDraw files are source code (at least according to the definition in the LGPL). And unless you consider rendering a specific kind of compilation, LGPL would not allow you to do anything useful with a parts (...) (20 years ago, 12-Jun-04, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | 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)
|
| |
| | Re: License Intent
|
|
(...) From (URL): »However, linking a "work that uses the Library" with the Library creates an executable that is a derivative of the Library (because it contains portions of the Library), rather than a "work that uses the library". The executable (...) (20 years ago, 12-Jun-04, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: License Intent
|
|
(...) Actually I beliee that this is the exact case where the LGPL differes from the GPL. Since the Parts 'library' will only be referecned as a library, I think that (if the LGPL were used on it,) it's license wouldn't pollute the license of the (...) (20 years ago, 11-Jun-04, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: License Intent
|
|
(...) I doubt it. Going by what I've seen in the Open source programming environment, the file's original author is considered the copyright owner, even after someonelse makes a bug fix or some other tweak. If the change is big enough, (whole new (...) (20 years ago, 11-Jun-04, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Leaving Brand Retail
|
|
As quite a few of you know, I've been working part time at the Woodfield LEGO store since it opened last October. During my time there, I had the joy of seeing many familiar LUGNET faces pop by, and even was able to meet a few new people as well. I (...) (20 years ago, 11-Jun-04, to lugnet.people, lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: License Intent
|
|
(...) Another question: if Joe submits a new file, and later on Jane fixes it, how much IP does Jane really have on the file? More concretely, we're fairly confident the Jessiman's will agree to license all of James' files to the (new) library. Many (...) (20 years ago, 10-Jun-04, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: License Intent
|
|
(...) Well, that's been our M.O. so far. So if we continue to distribute files under that umbrella, we won't be in any worse shape than we are now. (...) Yes. Agreed. However, we can (and probably should) start labeling everything that is covered (...) (20 years ago, 10-Jun-04, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: License Intent
|
|
All what follows is my opinion only. (...) authors "give up copyright". Let's not confuse PD with right of redistribution. Let's not confuse giving up copyright with right of redistribution. What I am suggesting is that by posting a part to the (...) (20 years ago, 10-Jun-04, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: License Intent
|
|
(...) You are correct here, I should have used the term 'file' or 'work' instead of 'part'. From a copyright standpoint I mean 'work of an author'. (...) There are two ways to looks at this issue. 1) Get permission of all those involved and get them (...) (20 years ago, 10-Jun-04, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
