|
In lugnet.cad.dev.org.ldraw, Larry Pieniazek writes:
> Why be exclusionary? What's wrong with providing a heavily disclaimed
> link, or going the next step and allowing different categories.
> [...]
> I don't want to start any wars, but I just think that there is some
> exclusionism going on here. You and Todd are going to exclude people for
> not very good reasons, I fear.
I hate to reply just to insert a "me too", but I whole-heartedly agree. And
folks (I won't name names) second-guessing James' prejudices without actually
having *met* him exhibits more than a fair amount of arrogance, IMHO.
The way I understand it, we have a very powerful and low-cost tool, which --
by nature of its library source being re-written -- is extremely useful for
more than just Lego modelling. And James allowed anyone under the sun to make
new pieces; his only restriction was that he could control which pieces were
allowed into his parts files.
Linking to, or even hosting, clone pieces on ldraw.org would in no way
"pollute" the LDraw parts library as long as they're not included in the
"official" parts files. And allowing for more than just Lego modelling would
increase LDraw's exposure. No one can argue against that.
Getting offa my soapbox now...
Cheers,
- jsproat
|
|
Message has 2 Replies:
Message is in Reply To:
64 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
|
|
|
|