| |
In lugnet.cad.dev, Larry Pieniazek writes:
> It can't be "justified", but stamping one's foot isn't going to help,
> Jeremy, and you know that.
Fine, okay, you can call it what you want. The fact remains, something
needs to be done. I'm making it known the only way I know how. The delay
in the parts update system is becoming pretty unpopular, and it begs the
question: is this being done for the users, or for the system?
> I think what we need is an unoffical update. Package them up as unofficial
> and tell people to take their chances. But realise that there is probably at
> least one part in that update that will break something. What part is it?
> Dunno. That's what the review process determines.
As long as the preview is released with sufficient (read: any) warning of
such, I doubt people will complain.
A *significant* side benefit of this is that obviously broken pieces will
have a better chance of being found before being put through the voting process.
> Rather than just dumping theme somewhere, though, they DO need to be
> packaged up the same way the other releases are. Then people can install
> them the same way, and when review happens, the replacements for the ones
> that have issues that missed getting identified in this unreviewed update
> will be in a subsequent update and replace them.
*sigh* I disagree.
Firstly, you don't want any kind of official stamp on an unofficial
distribution. This is so that the effort it takes for individual end-users
to install unofficial parts has a better chance of being remembered, and so
that there's no confusion about the difference between an offical and an
unofficial update. If someone *really* wants to play with an unofficial
part, then you need to assume a minimum amount of competency for the
end-user. This is equally true for parts/* and p/* .
Also, since time is a huge issue here, why go through the effort of
pretty-packaging them at all?
Lastly, and this is the biggie, if someone's looking for a part and it only
exists in the unofficial parts preview, then that someone is probably not
likely to want to dump the entire unofficial set into their parts directory.
The thing is, there's a bottleneck here because one or several people don't
have the time to push the update system changes through. This is
understandable and perfectly fine, given the volunteer nature of LDraw.
Offload that time onto the end-users, then.
Cheers,
- jsproat
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
Message is in Reply To:
60 Messages in This Thread:
  
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
