TheAlmightyOS

Who says anyone needs a say in how anyone distributes anyone's mods? We are discussing possibilities, pipe dreams and some possible tools which, unless Squad deems it so, would be completely and utterly optional for modders to use. We don't want to dictate what you guys do. Who would want that suicide inducing job? We just want to try and come up with a way to bring a small amount of order to the chaos without interfering with you guys at all.

Correct me if I am wrong, but I see no mention of telling you how to do things. Only stating that there is an issue. That issue is not with the mod authors. That does not mean that issue does not exist. EXCELLENT!!! This is the kinda stuff I have been looking for. Not you crying or being rejected, that would just be mean and... I am just going to stfu on that. Anywho, THANK YOU for your input on the metadata approach. Sarbian, at first glance I do not see your mods listed on the KSP-AVC Plugin. Is it safe to say that you do not use this in your mods? If not, may I ask what brought you to that decision?

You're not the one in the fire getting roasted I need to learn when to STFU. EDIT: So now YOU threw yourself into the fire. Well, at least I will have a buddy in the burn unit Keks, I think if we work together with the KVC crew we could add more to the .version file, aka metadata. The Mod author has to go to the site anyway to generate the file (opt-in), why not have them fill out two or three more fields of information then when they download a version file and the version DB is updated, our repo gets the medadata file OR we combine databases with the KVC guys. It's a thought at least And what kinda code are we talking here?

Why do you believe he has no say? Does he not play KSP just like the rest of us?

really, you criticize my efforts yet have a link to a "modlist" in your sig? Should I tell you the only problem you are trying to solve with that has already been solved HERE? You are not even mod author! If you are not going to be constructive then go away

Ah, just asking cause I didn't see a license in there. I have a spark of an idea. talk it out with me if you would. So, as you know I am looking at two projects: http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/threads/85989 http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/threads/79745 The first, full of misguided ideas (including those by yours truly), actually aims at creating a meta-data repository for mods. The general idea is that modders or "maintainers" create a meta-file that has the directory structure of the mod, licences, author, download location, etc. It is ok in theory but not practical in my opinion Second, you have KVC, a full fledged working mod that is currently being used by a list of mods already. Each mod that supports KVC has a small *.version file somewhere in the mod directory. This file is created by going to an online site that generates the file and updates a database. Now, what if we combine these two? Add some select meta-data to the version file. BUT, how would that help the mod author? For the example of PreciseNode, what would you gain? Well, the imitate answer is you get less people spamming your thread saying your mod doesn't work cause they have an outdated version. However, I think we could do much much better. The authors would need a way to generate this file(s). So why not an application, maybe written in java, that would create the files and update the online database? Why make it stop there? Have it update the changelog and then upload the file for you! I know you said you did not not like uploading to multiple locations. What if this tool did it for you? But, of course, then you have multiple support locations so actually that would not be of benefit. This all ramblings going off what people have told me thus far.

You are 100% Something that has gotten twisted in this thread is that I want to change this. I don't. I saw an issue with UPDATING and BROWSING mods, so I went though the progression of finding some sort of solution. First, I knew curse was quite disliked by the mod authors so I put up a poll about maybe finding and pushing for Squad to pick an alternative. Did not go well. People got to thinking I wanted to overhaul the whole **** thing. Personally, I do not mind using the forum to announce mods and the various options to host. It just makes updating and browsing a bit of an issue. But, if I can put all the pieces together and get two projects working together... I think I might be on to something.

Precise node?! This is yours?! Great stuff! On my must have list. But I thought you said you didn't maintain it anymore? My version is 1.0.0 So, along with the plugin you have the changelog txt and the source files. I see this in a few mods. Is the source code required by your license?

Thank you for shareing. What I hear from you I am hearing from a lot of different authors: More locations mean more headaches. I can understand that. Back when you were still active, when you packaged up your mod did you do anything particular? Did you name it a specific way? Or did you just zip it up and send it to dropbox? *And I do understand. But how can I learn how to make it easier for you guys if I don't know you guys I want to get to know you guys and the processes you use then piece it all together. Some of the ideas out there right now could very well make it easier on everyone but not if we don't have all the facts to base our work

Sal, a fair number of "add-on" authors have said in no uncertain terms will they use curse. So even if/when the curse client supports KSP, many of those mods will be unavailable to those using that client. Like the community option of KerbalStuff, I think there is support for a community "Add-on" manager. I am just looking into that option. And my thread went and blew up.

I am confused by your use of "official hubs". There is only one, and that is curse. What choices do you believe we have that would fit your definition? Which brings me back to why I want to talk. This just keeps going in circles.... I really just want to talk to mod authors and get some info. I don't want to change anything. I just want to collect data

http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/threads/88733 You (unfortunately) do not speak for most modders here. Link goes to my first public reaming on this issue. You are right though. Curse is bad and Squad should have done their homework before handing it off

I think this is what I have been fighting from the beginning. I really fudged up the wording in the beginning (didn't help that I was pissed) and now I am public enemy number one. Not going to give up though. I might not be very good at this but I am persistent.

What you are asking for is not fair. You know as well as I do that those posts would be spread across hundreds of threads. So instead, here are all the threads discussing projects to make mod managers OR somehow make updating easier: http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/threads/78861 http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/threads/85865 http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/threads/64058 http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/threads/79745 http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/threads/55401 http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/threads/85989 I am sure you can find your 20 within the comments of those threads. Thesonicgalaxy, there is a problem. It isn't with you. It isn't with your mod. It isn't even with KSP, Squad or Curse! The issue is with those of us that see the problem and have not made a fix yet I asked a few modders why they mod. The common answer was they mod for themselves and they mod to make the game the way they think it should be. Think of this like research for a mod. I want to make the way mods are updated the way I think it should be and the way the people in those threads and the modders alike agree with. I am not a bad enough coder to write a mod manager. But I can get ideas, I can share them, I can talk with you guys. And that is what I am going to do You guys can keep telling me there isn't a problem. Tell me I am being a whole lot of things I am not. But I am here to talk and I am not going to give up. Yeah, Nexus would be nice but a vast majority of the mod authors have stated they would not want to move again. Furthermore, I would like to discus ways that Authors like yourself don't have to move where you put mods nor do much if anything differently. Mind if I ask you a few questions about your process?

The problem exists. Not for the modders, but for the users. please see the bottom of post #73

HAH! love that meme.... Anyway, what would would you use to describe a remark that is intended to be taken in a negative, possibly hurtful, way towards the general conversation? Seriously, what would you use cause anything I can learn about not offending you guys the better. Everyone thinks I am trying to do something I am not. This thread has turned into such a mess. I admit it was my own doing in the beginning, should not have started a thread pissed. But now... I don't understand the negativity. I apologized for the caps usage, tried to explain my intent but only two people have been willing to talk to me thus far. I am not a white knight, I am not some dult making demands ether. I don't want to be the guy who fixes everything. I just want to talk. I wan't to understand the modder side of things. That is it.

And I know you were just being hostile when you said this, but just for fun if you give me your email in pm I will have CompTIA send you a copy of my A+|ce cert. Also, I have experience using JIRA, Remedy, Tracker, Version Manager and OpenTicket. While I do work with these ticketing systems I much prefer to be in the field solving problems. I am not exactly sure what the ITIL cert is for. Seems like more of a European standard for IT administration going off a quick glance at the wiki. I am not qualified to tell you guys what to do if that is what you were getting at with your jab. However, does one need a certification to talk and discuss?

Southernrock, thank you for the support, but you are not helping. I know you mean well and I agree with what you are saying. But please understand what works for some communities does not work for others. Yes, moving to the nexus would be much simpler, FOR THE END USER. But for the Mod authors? Not so much. They have already had to move twice. Plus it adds yet another point for them to update. They will not be convinced to completely move over and frankly neither would I and I use Nexus for everything.

I don't think I am a white knight. I ain't trying to save the mod Authors. The divide is not between the mod authors it is between the authors and the users (please READ my explanation in the post you are using to attack me with). I am sorry so many users can't install your mod correctly. I use MechJeb a lot. Someone would have to be very dense not to install it right. I do not know where you got the idea about handling support requests. I just want to talk, sarbian. I am sorry I offended you. And you might not like me but, man, you are a brilliant modder. I respect you. You say your issue is "some users come on the forum and fill my threads with "It does not work, I m sure you did not even test it and you are evil".". User blast back IS an issue I want to consider and talk about. I do not have a solution for this, but if we all talk about these issues maybe we can find a solution.

YES! Communication! Thank you for talking to me Ippo You are correct. And the solution for those issues must meet the criteria of not putting an additional burden on the mod author AND satisfying the needs of end users. Which, is why I want to talk to you guys. Do you or have you thought about using a Version file in your mods, Ippo? Am I that user? But yes, I agree with you. I had a spark of an idea last night of combining the two. Right now trying to get some information from Keks to write up what this Version-meta file might look like. But it would require the author to input a bit more information and I want to see if that would fly or not. Still more to talk about.

Keks, I think I got an idea. Well, more like your idea but with some alterations. Do you have an example of that meta-file you want to use? oh, sorry about not responding directly to responses. I think I might be on to something big. You ever talk to the guy who maintains Version Checker? BTW, want to see the train wreck from that rant: http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/threads/89490

***I am starting fresh at this point because you guys have not been listening to me, only attacking me. Let's try to do something a bit more constructive, shall we?*** I think I will start with ferram4 as he has been a bit more receptive (or at least responsive) to my questions... Ok, so somewhere along the line what I am trying to do has become twisted OR so many have been trying to force you guys to bend over backwards that you see everyone that way. I assure you, I am not that kind of person ferram4. Here is a list of things I Do Not Want Additional workload for the modders Change how the modders distribute their work to alienate anyone else in this thread​ I see two things. A system that does work for the modders and one that is difficult to utilize for users (see explanation below). You're right, ferram4, there is no reason for the modders to change. So I am not going to ask them to. The point of this thread, before it got hopelessly mangled, was to talk to you and your peers, ferram4. Although this thread has not gone to plan I have already learned a few things. The most important thus far, the blowback of supporting your mods. I could see why some modders might want to keep the pool of potential users small. It was something I did not realize mod authors would have to deal with though I go though that sort of thing every day. But there is more I want to learn. I want to learn about your processes, how you deal with KSP updates and how you handle support requests when you do get them. I want to know your difficulties and what works (which sounds like almost everything) and what doesn't I do not claim to have a grand plan. I have no fix all. Hell, all I got is a few fragments of various ideas, mostly borrowed from projects all over KSP's forum and a few from other modding communities. My goal is to talk to you all and maybe, hopefully, walk away with an idea. That's all there is here. Because everyone has been telling you guys how to fix "your" problem (you guys don't have the problem). I am comming here, asking the mod authors questions so that I can fix the user problems. I hope I am being more clear now *The user issues: I am going to use my own experience. I consider myself an advanced user being that I can mod myself just not in this game yet (I will find time to figure out unity soon). I can *install* (unzip and drop in a folder) mods and for the most part troubleshoot them myself. *IF* I know the name of the mod I want I can find it easily via the forum or google but I mostly use the Community Library. Though it doesn't list them all. Checking my MODS folder (I keep a zip of all my mods pre-install so I can find them again if I need to update) shows 34 mods. That is 34 Mods that may or may not have dependencies, are dependencies themselves. These are all the latest versions, compiled for 0.24.1. It has taken me a week to collect and cultivate this collection of mods. I have not played not a single hour of KSP this week other than to test mods. If 0.25 came out tonight, it would start all over again. That is the users issue. I know it is not the Mod authors problem and I am not asking you guys to make it your problem. It's my problem. It is the one I have chosen to fix. And I would like to talk to you all, learn, think, put pieces together. Come up with ideas on the fly (like post 16. Won't someone talk about post 16?). What you think guys? Can we be civil and talk? I promise to communicate more accurately

Nope. They are UNITED! Against me but hey! UNITED!

1. It did not start off very positive, I admit. But I think that is fixed now, don't you think? 2. I had a potential idea which I pointed out in post 16, combine the two projects and put meta-data in the .version files. Obviously this would have to be talked out. I am not some master planner. I saw something that might work, lets talk it out see where it goes 3. I have no blueprint. All I know is this could be better. And I want to talk to mod authors, collect information and see if we as a community can find a solution that does not interfere with the modders and their process. 4. Modification Standards DOES NOT MEAN standards for modders. I mean it could. But in my case it is more a standard to find, browse, download and update. It is not my intent to put that burden on the mod author. Right now, I have no ideas, just some thoughts. But I could make them a bit more clear with communication, with the modders and the heads of those projects I mentioned in post 16 You are being hostile right now. Maybe I deserve it. I am very bad with written communication. So I am just going to say sorry. I am sorry I riled you up. But I want to talk to you. I want to figure this out. Want to help? ps. I am sure I never said anything about making everything awesome

I support applications that are used by every single teacher, principle and superintendent and general education worker in the state of TX. We just promoted new code to production and introduced a new app that ended up causing multiple issues. Trust me, you have literally no idea how much work and how much submitter anger that I deal with on a daily basis. And I don't even write the [darn] code!!! It is a very thankless job. What I am trying to say, Nathankell, is that I completely understand where you are coming from. And if I work this out like I have it in my head, the user would have to figure out how to use Google and find the forum to post feedback. There would be no direct feedback buttons. Any feedback would be for the application we are going to create. SR, I agree with your general observations, but disagree with pushing yet another Mod hosting site. And trust me, I am a Nexus guy. It just does not work here.