[LSC] Long filenames in the official library

[Travis Cobbs]

I'm going to try to revive this discussion.  At this point, I'm personally
in favor of allowing long filenames, as long as we strictly control the
character set that's allowed in them (probably alphanumeric, plus underscore
and dash, and maybe #).

There's no sense spending the time coming up with a new policy if long
filenames are going to be voted down completely, so I'd like everyone to
vote yes or no on whether you're open to allowing long filenames.  My vote
is yes.  Note that this vote just determines if we continue on to draft an
official spec for allowed filenames.  Until (if) we agree on that, nothing
happens.

--Travis

On 4/4/07, ldraw at holly-wood.it <ldraw at holly-wood.it> wrote:

>

> guys,

>

> I just wanna make sure you bring this to a happy or sad

> ending.

>

> w.

>

>

>

>

> ----- Original Message -----

> Da : "Travis Cobbs" <tcobbs at gmail.com>

> A : "LDraw Standards Committee" <lsc at ldraw.org>

> Oggetto : Re: [LSC] Long filenames in the official library

> Data : Wed, 28 Mar 2007 16:59:54 -0700

>

> > Kevin clarified that LPub/LSynth should only have problems

> > with long filenames that contain spaces.  We definitely

> > don't want to allow that in the library, so at this point

> > I'd say that perhaps the best bet would be to somehow get

> > an idea of which programs would have problems with long

> > filenames.

> >

> > --Travis

> >

> > On 3/28/07, Travis Cobbs <tcobbs at gmail.com> wrote:

> > >

> > > Please read this thread on LUGNET if you have not

> > already done so: >

> > > http://news.lugnet.com/cad/?n=14492

> > >

> > > I think we should discuss whether or not to allow long

> > > filenames in files in the official library.  At this

> > > point in time, I'm personally leaning toward maintaining

> > > the 8.3 limitation, based mostly on Kevin's comment that

> > supporting long filenames would require updates to

> > > LPub/LSynth.  Not so much that he has to update them,

> > > but that his need to update them could very well

> > indicate the same need in many other LDraw-compatible

> > > programs. Frankly, I'm surprised that they would need to

> > be updated. >

> > > Unfortunately, I think that empirical testing of

> > > existing programs is the only way we're going to be able

> > > to have a good idea about current levels of support.  I

> > for one don't relish doing those tests.  We can ask for

> > > program authors to chime in with a yea or nay on LUGNET,

> > > but I'll be surprised if get get a representative

> > response. >

> > > --Travis

> > >

> > >

> >

> >

> > _______________________________________________

> > LSC mailing list

> > LSC at ldraw.org

> > http://five.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/lsc

> >

> _______________________________________________

> LSC mailing list

> LSC at ldraw.org

> http://five.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/lsc

>

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://five.pairlist.net/pipermail/lsc/attachments/20070508/edaa1fe9/attachment.html>