 | | Re: " (needs work)" officially sanctioned by LSC
|
|
mikeheide schrieb: (...) A new Version of DATHeader is now available at www.michael-heidemann.de. Any comments are welcome Michael Heidemann (18 years ago, 24-Feb-07, to lugnet.cad.dat.parts, lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: " (needs work)" officially sanctioned by LSC
|
|
Travis Cobbs schrieb: (...) Good News! I have to go to update DATHeader. There should be a new version available tomorrow. (18 years ago, 23-Feb-07, to lugnet.cad.dat.parts, lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: " (needs work)" officially sanctioned by LSC
|
|
Yeah! Thanks guys! Big encouragement to set my parts moving again and hopefully it will encourage the community by getting a lot more parts more readily available. -Matt :) (...) ---...--- www.auctionbrick.com - username mchiles Matt Chiles 1006 (...) (18 years ago, 23-Feb-07, to lugnet.cad.dat.parts, lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | " (needs work)" officially sanctioned by LSC
|
|
The LDraw Standards Committee (LSC) has officially sanctioned the use of " (needs work)" in part titles to allow parts to be certified with known problems. Note that this has been used for years now in the library, but many part authors and (...) (18 years ago, 22-Feb-07, to lugnet.announce, lugnet.cad.dat.parts, lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Accountability of "Key Positions" - updated version
|
|
(...) I think LDraw politics are a litle more tame than Italy's ;) I don't think that would be a problem. I would hope that for it to happen the situation would have to be so bad that it would be unanimous (apart from in this type of situation which (...) (18 years ago, 22-Feb-07, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: Accountability of "Key Positions" - updated version
|
|
(...) hmm ... as you might know Italy is going through a new cabinet crises (again) and faces new elections and the risk to be governed by mr. conflict of interest himself (read: berlusconi). what about the conflict of interest if the key position (...) (18 years ago, 22-Feb-07, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Reminder: 2007 Steering Committee Nominations closing in a week
|
|
Hi folks, As outlined here: (URL) will close in a week, at 11:59 PM GMT on 28 February 2007 and elections will start the 1st of March. Only those candidates that have been nominated, seconded, and have accepted as outlined, will be eligible for (...) (18 years ago, 21-Feb-07, to lugnet.cad, lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw, lugnet.announce)
|
| |
| | Re: Accountability of "Key Positions" - updated version
|
|
(...) to get pedantic (likewise not via SteerCo) I think this may be better (change is in bold or square brackets) Section 6.09: Removal of Key Positions Key Positions are accountable to the Steering Committee and might be removed if someone fails (...) (18 years ago, 20-Feb-07, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Accountability of "Key Positions" - updated version
|
|
Many thx for your input! Find below a revised version of the motion. Please note this has not gone through the SteerCo and is proposed solely by me in an attempt to move on from this issue as quickly as possible. w. ---...--- Beginning of motion (...) (18 years ago, 20-Feb-07, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: Accountability of "Key Positions": Call for Public Discussion and Consensus
|
|
While it's implied in the current text, I think you should make it expicit that "firing" someone requires 3 of the 5 SteerCo members to vote in favor of "firing" that person. --Travis (18 years ago, 19-Feb-07, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: Accountability of "Key Positions": Call for Public Discussion and Consensus
|
|
(...) Hi Willy, I agree with these additions. Just some minor changes: 6.08: "about appointments of new ones" -> "about new appointments" 6.10: "otherwise unable to fulfill" -> "otherwise unable to fulfill his or her duties" (repetetive but I think (...) (18 years ago, 19-Feb-07, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: Accountability of "Key Positions": Call for Public Discussion and Consensus
|
|
Willy Tschager schrieb: (...) snip (...) snip (...) I agree overall to your thoughts. This is a good step for the future. We should bring this point in a fast way to go. Michael Heidemann (18 years ago, 18-Feb-07, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Accountability of "Key Positions": Call for Public Discussion and Consensus
|
|
Hi folks, We know that you would prefer reading about new parts updates announcements instead of politics and bureaucratics, but unfortunately those things also have to be done and decided on in order to ensure the smooth running of LDraw.org. As (...) (18 years ago, 18-Feb-07, to lugnet.cad, lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw, lugnet.announce) !
|
| |
| | Re: Contributor Agreement License details
|
|
(...) Here is a newly revised and _proposed_ CAreadme attempting to deal with most of the issues brought up in this post. Please note this has not gone through the SteerCo and is proposed solely by me in an attempt to move on from this issue as (...) (18 years ago, 10-Feb-07, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: Contributor Agreement License details - updated version
|
|
(...) I'm not sure about the exact text but id state derived works as "containing the original file or visual representation/rendering of..." This happily excludes models (except where they include unofficial parts), but includes all renders of both (...) (18 years ago, 7-Feb-07, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: Contributor Agreement License details - updated version
|
|
(...) There is one aspect that I am a little worried about and it deals with unofficial files... we can make it clear what a model file is (references to parts only) but then we have the problem that it is considered good practise to include (...) (18 years ago, 7-Feb-07, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: Contributor Agreement License details - updated version
|
|
(...) Yeah, I think the meaning was there, but the language was still a bit unclear. Here's a nice place to look for ideas on how to rework the language. (URL) section on Software is probably the closest match, and I believe this is the key (...) (18 years ago, 7-Feb-07, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: Contributor Agreement License details - updated version
|
|
(...) of course with the bit about rendered images still left in... sorry. It's late :) Tim (18 years ago, 7-Feb-07, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: Contributor Agreement License details - updated version
|
|
(...) Probably... maybe "LDraw.org does not consider LDraw model files (defined as being MPDs or LDR files whose main purpose is creating a model, ultimate discretion lies with the current LDraw SteerCo) to be derivative works of the Parts Library." (...) (18 years ago, 7-Feb-07, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
| |
| | Re: Contributor Agreement License details - updated version
|
|
(...) Wouldn't this include modifying/converting...publishing the dat files themselves (a true derivative work)? (18 years ago, 7-Feb-07, to lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw)
|
