Subject:
|
Re: list/group merge (was RE: Newbie Question.. FAQ?
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.robotics
|
Date:
|
Thu, 5 Nov 1998 00:35:20 GMT
|
Original-From:
|
Kekoa Proudfoot <kekoa@Graphics.Stanford.EDU>
|
Viewed:
|
2894 times
|
| |
|
|
> I would agree that there is strong enough division between the three
> following topics to warrent seperate fora:
>
> -- "Pure" Lego robotics: using only Real Lego hardware, although including
> using alternate development environments. This is Mindstorms (etc.) from
> a user level.
> -- Mindstorms reverse engineering/metadevelopment: figuring out the
> internals, and building tools for others to use.
> -- Custom Lego robotics: homebrew and other commercial systems that
> interface with Lego. This is Lego robotics from a hardware-hacker's
> viewpoint. And the 'non-purist' approach puts a different attitude and
> feel to the whole thing. Someone posted to the list just a bit ago
> saying that they hoped the excitement over Mindstorms would die down
> soon because they wanted to talk about other possiblities. While that's
> certainly an ok view to have, a lot of us (most of us?) feel
> differently.
My only concern is that there is not enough traffic to warrant a split.
Reverse engineering will die down after a few more months - the firmware is
95% finished as far as I'm concerned, with only the ROM and new firmware
really remaining - when these are done, traffic on these topics will die
down substantially. Posts relating to custom Lego robotics have always
seemed to be in a sideband - interesting, but never a major talking point.
I'm sure that purists can withstand the wincing when hearing about the
occasional slicing and dicing of a Lego part. I even think occasional
threads discussing using another controller (Handy Board or Stamp, say)
with Lego bricks are fine, since I can't imagine them ever taking over the
focus of the list/newsgroup. (If they do, however, that might warrant a
split.)
At least, this is my take from the lego-robotics side of things.
From the lugnet.robotics side of things, the charter specifically refers to
"building" as being the focus, but in a very general sense. On the other
hand, the lego-robotics side of things seems to be focused on reverse
engineering and other hacking, although I'm under the impression that
discussions about building are welcome. There might be some amount of
conflict there - I can see many builder-types being completely uninterested
in internal details. So if any split is warranted, I think it would be
between building and reverse engineering / internals, with lego-robotics
attached (at LUGNET) to the reverse engineering / internals side of the
split. (Personally, I'm not really for a split, but I could go either
way.)
Comments?
-Kekoa
|
|
Message has 3 Replies:
 | | Re: list/group merge (was RE: Newbie Question.. FAQ?
|
| (...) I think the word "build" on the front-end of the charter is a holdover from when the group was once called build.robotics before the renaming of the hierarchies. You're right, it's not really restricted to building. And on the (URL) page, it's (...) (26 years ago, 5-Nov-98, to lugnet.robotics)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Re: list/group merge (was RE: Newbie Question.. FAQ?
|
| (...) I would agree that there is strong enough division between the three following topics to warrent seperate fora: -- "Pure" Lego robotics: using only Real Lego hardware, although including using alternate development environments. This is (...) (26 years ago, 4-Nov-98, to lugnet.robotics)
|
20 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
|
|
|
|
