Subject:
|
Re: Bugs with the Parts Tracker
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw
|
Date:
|
Mon, 3 Nov 2003 04:16:29 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
513 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw, Franklin W. Cain wrote:
> Here's a good example of why the current nomenclature is messed up
> (in my humble, yet aggressively vociferous, opinion).
>
> http://www.ldraw.org//cgi-bin/ptdetail.cgi?f=parts/30375csd.dat
>
> This new file does not -- repeat ***NOT*** -- need any unofficial
> parts, and yet it says "UNCERTIFIED FILES" instead of "NEEDS VOTES/
> ADMIN REVIEW".
First off, a bigger issue with this file is that it is a model, not a part. I
feel it goes beyond the idea of a shortcut, or complete assembly.
However, to your point. This file uses *3* unofficial files. Yes, they are
updates of already-official files, but they are still unofficial. I will
totally agree that -- in this specific case -- the unofficialness of the
sub-files doesn't affect the parent file. That's not a generally-true
statement. We sometimes update official files in ways that change the file
considerably. So I feel it's reasonable for the PT to handle this situation the
way it does.
Steve
|
|
Message is in Reply To:
 | | 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)
|
24 Messages in This Thread:
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
