From RepRap
Jump to: navigation, search

I just went through and deleted a large chunk of the content on this page, because it was full of bad information. Personally, I maintain and recommend the documentation on, but I have no problem with documentation being hosted here as well SO LONG AS IT IS ACCURATE! Please do not just copy and paste a parts list from another printer and assume it must be correct, it probably is not! People will be buying parts and cutting materials based on the information here, and wrong information is worse than no information.

  • Thanks for letting me know that there were factual errors here, the information will be updated as soon as I figure out what they are. On that note, I cant find any information regarding copyright/license on your page documentation? -Danielpublic 20:41, 9 December 2011 (UTC)

Hi Daniel. I think the best license is probably CC-BY-SA. I generally don't care what is done with the content of the site, so long as any copies link back to the original since I consider it the authoritative site. That applies to anything on unless it specifically says otherwise (Nothing says otherwise at present, but it is possible there may be exceptions in the future), as well as the BoM on Google Docs.

There is a bug preventing others from editing the MendelMax Wiki at present, but sometime soon I will find time to figure it out and fix it so anyone can edit the Wiki. The BoM is purposely locked in order to keep people from accidentally making changes, but I welcome any suggestions you may have.

Please feel free to ask any questions in our IRC Channel or on our Google Group. .

  • Thanks for starting to getting the page here a bit more ajour! It would be helpful if you could point out most of the critical errors besides the threaded rod cutting. Then I could add/correct those here later this week. Regards /D.

I deleted the content after finding several errors. I don't remember them all, but a few were the threaded and smooth rod lengths were wrong, the recommended belts were both incorrect and too short, there were several bits of hardware on the list that were incorrect... I started to fix the problems, but after a couple minutes decided it was not worth the bother. There is already a full BoM available that has all the information and lots more, so it seemed to make more sense to send people to the "official" BoM rather than trying to duplicate it.

Personally, I don't want to have to maintain two separate BoM's. That is why there is not even a full BoM on the MendelMax site, only on the Google spreadsheet. That way there is no chance of errors creeping in when the two docs get out of sync.

If you want to take responsibility for maintaining one here, that is fine, but why not start from the known-good BoM, rather than copying one for some other machine? It's almost certain that fewer errors will creep in if you do it that way.

First I thought I would update this article to include all MendelMax 2 information but that is rather difficult seeing all specifications, bill of material, etc. are all different. Then I noticed there's a MendelMax 2 article already out there. Since this MendelMax article is 90% about MendelMax 1.x I've decided to remove the few MM2 parts it contained and added links to the MM2 article instead. This way this article can remain focused on the MendelMax 1 and it won't become out-of-synch with the MendelMax 2 article. I think this is best, the only alternative I can see is to remove the MendelMax 2 article and integrate it entirely in here, but I don't think that will become very readable, seeing the differences. Syzop (talk) 04:15, 20 December 2013 (PST)