|
|
Unofficial File parts/99798b.dat
Next File |
Prev File |
Download |
Review |
Edit |
CA Header Edit |
Events
File Header:
0 Technic Pneumatic Pump 1 x 1 6L (Extended)
0 Name: 99798b.dat
0 Author: Philippe Hurbain [Philo]
0 !LDRAW_ORG Unofficial_Shortcut
0 !LICENSE Redistributable under CCAL version 2.0 : see CAreadme.txt
0 BFC CERTIFY CCW
0 !HISTORY 2012-06-30 [cwdee] Compensate for change of origin for 99799
Status:
 Needs admin review. (CCCX)
Size: 465 bytes
Reviewers' certifications:
MMR1988=certify
MagFors=certify
Steffen=certify
Required (unofficial) subfiles:
Related (unofficial) files:
(none)
File reviews and updates:
At Tue Sep 13 07:50:04 2011, the file was initially submitted.
Submitted by: Philo
======================================================================
At Wed Sep 14 21:35:05 2011, the following review was posted:
Reviewer: MagFors
Certification: certify
No comments were posted with this review.
======================================================================
At Fri Dec 30 15:35:02 2011, the following review was posted:
Reviewer: arezey
Certification: certify
No comments were posted with this review.
======================================================================
At Sat Dec 31 03:00:11 2011, the following review was posted:
Reviewer: Steffen
Certification: hold
Comments:
should be renumbered to ...c02 instead of ...b
======================================================================
At Sat Dec 31 07:05:06 2011, the following review was posted:
Reviewer: Philo
Certification: novote
Comments:
Similar to 74982a and b that have been released recently!!!
======================================================================
At Sat Dec 31 14:25:05 2011, the following review was posted:
Reviewer: Steffen
Certification: hold
Comments:
That was a mistake IMHO which we should not repeat here.
They can use ...a and ...b, and this one ...c01 and ...c02, why not.
We could even think of MOVE-TO the a,b stuff to a c01, c02 combo,
but that might be overkill.
======================================================================
At Sat Dec 31 17:45:05 2011, the following review was posted:
Reviewer: Philo
Certification: novote
Comments:
I don't remember the exact rationale, and I don't have PT archives, but we concluded last time that it would be better with a/b!
======================================================================
At Sun Jan 1 10:40:03 2012, the following review was posted:
Reviewer: mikeheide
Certification: certify
Comments:
It's simple.
We use ..c01 if we do not know the number for the assembly and the number in front of ..c01 is the main part.
As we know the number for tis assembly '99798' it is a good idea to only name this with a and b as trailing indicator.
So I ask Steffen to cert here!
======================================================================
At Sun Jan 1 11:15:07 2012, the following review was posted:
Reviewer: Philo
Certification: novote
Comments:
Ah - yes, my memory sometimes is flimsy! Thanks for the reminder, Mike...
======================================================================
At Sun Jan 1 15:30:06 2012, the following review was posted:
Reviewer: Steffen
Certification: certify
Comments:
that's perfectly reasonable.
we should put that into our documentation of file naming standard
where c01, c02, ... is documented.
======================================================================
At Sat Jun 30 20:00:07 2012, a new version of the file was submitted.
Submitted by: cwdee
Existing certification-votes were deleted.
======================================================================
At Sun Jul 1 19:30:06 2012 a Parts Tracker Admin edited the header.
======================================================================
At Sun Jul 1 22:00:12 2012, the following review was posted:
Reviewer: MagFors
Certification: certify
No comments were posted with this review.
======================================================================
At Thu Nov 22 13:15:03 2012, the following review was posted:
Reviewer: MMR1988
Certification: certify
No comments were posted with this review.
======================================================================
At Thu Jan 31 21:25:02 2013, the following review was posted:
Reviewer: Steffen
Certification: certify
No comments were posted with this review.
======================================================================
At Wed Mar 27 04:35:02 2013, the following review was posted:
Reviewer: Steffen
Certification: certify
No comments were posted with this review.
======================================================================
At Mon Apr 1 20:30:05 2013, the following review was posted:
Reviewer: Steffen
Certification: certify
No comments were posted with this review.
======================================================================
At Mon Apr 8 08:15:03 2013, the following review was posted:
Reviewer: Steffen
Certification: certify
No comments were posted with this review.
|
Certified! (ACCCX)