Subject:
|
Re: OMR Submission and Storage
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw
|
Date:
|
Fri, 23 Jul 1999 13:18:41 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
1092 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw, Tim Courtney writes:
> At 06:39 PM 7/22/99 , Scott R Dennett wrote:
> > I agree that a whole new newsgroup would be best, but I was just
> > trying to point out that it would probably work. Not a big deal
> > either
> > way as far as I am concerned. I get posts via email so I see all
> > the
> > headers anyway.
>
> So do I. But I probably wouldn't subscribe to a sets or omr newsgroup by
> mail. It would work, but why not avoid possible confusion and go for 100%
> certainty on a completely new dedicated newsgroup? Some people might think
> that cad.dat.models.sets is a dedicated OMR group if anything is appended
> to the charter. A new group would provide a border between casually
> posting LDrawn sets and submitting a polished work to an online repository.
What is the point of doing a set in ldraw if it is not going to be submitted to
the OMR? Since we have the models.sets, we don't need the OMR group. If I
remember correctly, Todd originally made models.sets *for* the OMR (or at least
that was a major reason). Personally, I think anything posted to models.sets
should be considered as a submission to the OMR.
Jeff
|
|
Message is in Reply To:
 | | Re: OMR Submission and Storage
|
| (...) So do I. But I probably wouldn't subscribe to a sets or omr newsgroup by mail. It would work, but why not avoid possible confusion and go for 100% certainty on a completely new dedicated newsgroup? Some people might think that (...) (25 years ago, 23-Jul-99, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
34 Messages in This Thread:
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
