Subject:
|
Re: Legacy Files on the Parts Tracker
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw
|
Date:
|
Mon, 29 Sep 2003 17:11:33 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
485 times
|
| |
|
|
In general, I agree with Orion that having the parts tracker is much better than
not having it, and that the main problem is that there are too few active
reviewers. Just as a reminder to those reviewers out there, look at the parts
queue, which sorts parts by age:
<http://www.ldraw.org/cgi-bin/ptqueue.cgi?full=0>
But, I do think that there could be some improvements with the parts tracker.
For one thing, I don't like how files with subfiles always get sorted to the
bottom of the parts list, because then they always say "X subfiles aren't
certified" instead of "needs more votes" or "needs admin review." I can't think
of any reason the minifig suticase hasn't been approved, other than it sorts to
the bottom of the queue, and so hasn't attracted the admins' attentions. I
think a way to fix this is to have the status ignore subfiles until it has
gotten all the votes it needs. Then these parts would go from "needs votes"
(SX) to "needs admin review" (CCSX) to "has uncertified subfiles" (ACCSX) to
"certified" (ACCX).
Another thing I don't like, is how we keep primitive files on hold, even when
there is nothing wrong with them. I agree that they shouldn't be released if
they aren't used, but it would be far easier to have someone upload a group of
ring, cone, and torus primitives as a block, review them all at once, and create
a special state that sets them aside until they are used (for instance,
"Approved Primitive").
Andy
|
|
Message has 7 Replies:
 | | Re: Legacy Files on the Parts Tracker
|
| (...) But how can you certify a part that uses subparts, if the subparts might change? Maybe the orientation of the file will change, and then the parent part would have to be modified? Or am I missing something? (21 years ago, 29-Sep-03, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
| | | Re: Legacy Files on the Parts Tracker
|
| (...) I think something like this (or just releasing unused primitives) would be useful. There is a clear advantage to "locking in" primitives: they are designed to be used by multiple authors; if they are not properly examined and said to be good, (...) (21 years ago, 30-Sep-03, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
| | | Re: Legacy Files on the Parts Tracker
|
| (...) I agree that the way subfiles are handled is a bit klunky, but I can't think of a better way to handle them. (...) Yes, I think that we should shift away from holding unused primitives. A simple novote would suffice or maybe a "Certified but (...) (21 years ago, 1-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)
| | | 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)
| | | 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)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Legacy Files on the Parts Tracker
|
| There are some files on the Parts Tracker that have been sitting there for quite some time (well over a year). Here's just a small group... These Roadsigns were initially uploaded in October 2001: (URL) their subfiles were not uploaded until (...) (21 years ago, 26-Sep-03, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
24 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
|
|
|
|
