To LUGNET HomepageTo LUGNET News HomepageTo LUGNET Guide Homepage
 Help on Searching
 
Post new message to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldrawOpen lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw in your NNTP NewsreaderTo LUGNET News Traffic PageSign In (Members)
 CAD / Development / Organizations / LDraw / 2065
2064  |  2066
Subject: 
Re: Renaming of 2916.dat
Newsgroups: 
lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw
Date: 
Tue, 23 Jul 2002 17:52:51 GMT
Viewed: 
402 times
  
In lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw, Robert M. Rodinsky writes:
I would like to object on the strongest terms possible the "Modified part
description" of the part 2916.dat. This is in keeping with my beliefs on how
parts should be named. Please refer to:

http://news.lugnet.com/cad/dev/org/ldraw/?n=1605

and

http://news.lugnet.com/cad/dev/org/ldraw/?n=1608

This is not necessarily a train part.

Is this file not my intellectual property? Shouldn't I have some control of
its contents?

Hey - my first PTadmin hornet's nest !!
Here's my rationalisation for changing the name, FWIW.
The only comment on the part name in the review history is from Steve Bliss.
No-one challenged Steve's suggestion that it should be linked by name to
2917.dat, so I assumed (quite wrongly, it appears) that putting this in the
train category was OK with everyone. Maybe if you had expressed that "strongest
terms" opinion on the PT I would have been aware of your strength of feeling.
I have now withdrawn the admin certify vote until we can reach a concensus.
IMHO, I don't think it is practical to have a discussion on every part name
change, without severely holding up the throughput, but others are welcome to
differ.

Chris



Message has 1 Reply:
  Re: Renaming of 2916.dat
 
(...) Probably true. Some discussion on the train related parts to establish general standards may help though, and it may make sense to do so in the context of specific parts. With respect to this one, does it at all make sense to change the name (...) (22 years ago, 23-Jul-02, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)

Message is in Reply To:
  Renaming of 2916.dat
 
I would like to object on the strongest terms possible the "Modified part description" of the part 2916.dat. This is in keeping with my beliefs on how parts should be named. Please refer to: (URL) is not necessarily a train part. Is this file not my (...) (22 years ago, 22-Jul-02, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)

15 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
    

Custom Search

©2005 LUGNET. All rights reserved. - hosted by steinbruch.info GbR