Tim Gould Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> For me the real issue is in overzealous (in my
> opinion) conditions for certification of official
> parts. But I'm fairly sure I'm in a minority for
> that view.
>
> Tim
We may be in minority, but you are not alone. IMO, primary focus should be on wether a part is correctly aligned, correct size and shape. Secondary, the part should have a name that the majority accepts and makes it easy to look up. But a reviewer's personal taste on maximum number of blank lines or what remarks should be allowed and how they are formatted is never an acceptable cause to hold a part in the Tracker.
As long as the primary requirements are met (and not compromized!), a part can always be updated for better use of primitives or improved detail works. And the users have their official parts much quicker.
I too have my personal taste. I don't want to see the most basic parts, like 3001-3010, sub-parted in their non-patterned versions. Personally, I think there's too much sub-parting in general. But if I even care to bring attention to this in the Tracker, I just make a Novote review on the part in question and ask if the sub-paring really is needed for this part. If then it goes official with all sub-parts and if it annoys me enough, I can easily inline it in my personal Parts directory.
The same should go for those reviewers who put parts on hold for too many blank lines or whatever personal-taste-oriented reason.
-------------------------------------------------------
> For me the real issue is in overzealous (in my
> opinion) conditions for certification of official
> parts. But I'm fairly sure I'm in a minority for
> that view.
>
> Tim
We may be in minority, but you are not alone. IMO, primary focus should be on wether a part is correctly aligned, correct size and shape. Secondary, the part should have a name that the majority accepts and makes it easy to look up. But a reviewer's personal taste on maximum number of blank lines or what remarks should be allowed and how they are formatted is never an acceptable cause to hold a part in the Tracker.
As long as the primary requirements are met (and not compromized!), a part can always be updated for better use of primitives or improved detail works. And the users have their official parts much quicker.
I too have my personal taste. I don't want to see the most basic parts, like 3001-3010, sub-parted in their non-patterned versions. Personally, I think there's too much sub-parting in general. But if I even care to bring attention to this in the Tracker, I just make a Novote review on the part in question and ask if the sub-paring really is needed for this part. If then it goes official with all sub-parts and if it annoys me enough, I can easily inline it in my personal Parts directory.
The same should go for those reviewers who put parts on hold for too many blank lines or whatever personal-taste-oriented reason.