fathed

Hello! I've made a powershell script that will check .version files and optionally download the new version. The script unfortunately is not currently signed, run get-help about_Execution_Policies in powershell and read the output to determine your solution. Most likely you'll need to do a Set-ExecutionPolicy -ExecutionPolicy RemoteSigned or create a bat file to run the script and pass -ExecutionPolicy to powershell.exe. Features: Checks the version files and provides the URL to download the latest. Optionally can download the update. By default to you your downloads directory, but is configurable on the command. Currently only spacedock.info and curseforge.com are supported. Can start KSP if you want, if specified, it'll start the 64-bit version on 64-bit windows. Todo: Add downloading from github.com. Add AVC support. Add better help. Get a signing cert. Detect non-steam clients. License: GPLv3 Download: GitHub Usage: Supports tab completion, so typing in "avc-cli.ps1 -" and hitting tab will list the available parameters. Eventually, running get-help avc-cli.ps1 will display the information below. AVC-CLI.ps1 Checks for new versions, notifies you if there's a newer version, and provides the download URL. You'll have to copy/paste the URL(s). AVC-CLI.ps1 -Download Downloads the updates to your downloads directory. AVC-CLI.ps1 -Download -DownloadPath D:\Temp Downloads to where you want. Needs to be a folder, or you'll get an error. AVC-CLI.ps1 -StartKSP Starts Kerbal Space Program when done. Starts 32-bit on 32-bit windows, 64-bit on 64-bit windows. AVC-CLI.ps1 -DisplayJSONErrors Badly named, but displays errors related to why the checking failed. In the image below, the reason the USITools.version failed is due to a 404, using this option you'd see that. The reason the EL.version failed, is due to non-standard JSON formating, you can't do "name":}, you must have a value. Displaying the errors wouldn't tell you that, you'll just get Error: Invalid JSON primitive: ., and a dump of the raw JSON data that failed to parse. Image: Changes: 0.1 - Initial Relase 0.1.1 - Fixed StartKSP x64-bit detection. 0.1.2 - Fixed downloading only from Spacedock.info for now, displays the URL if not spacedock. 0.2 - If downloading, and it finds a kerbalstuff.com link, it'll search spacedock.info for the mod. 0.2.1 - Moved the search code to it's own function. 0.3 - Adding downloading from Curseforge.com, made downloading from spacedock.info better, fixed illegal file names when trying to write the zip. Let me know if you run into any issues, or have suggestions! Thanks

In the latest version, the RemoteTech.version file's URL property points to https://raw.githubusercontent.com/RemoteTechnologiesGroup/RemoteTech/master/GameData/RemoteTech/RemoteTech.version, which is the old file for 1.6.9, and still references a download URL based on kerbalstuff. So checking for an updated version doesn't work correctly. Checking: RemoteTech.version Out of Date: RemoteTech Installed Version: 1.7.0 Latest Version: 1.6.9 Downloading: [Defunct link removed by a moderator] Thanks! Edit: It looks like 1.7.0 comes from the dev branch, and master is still at 1.6.9, so whenever you update the master from dev it should resolve the issue. And I fixed my broken version comparison that lead me to find this in the first place....

http://kerbalx.com/crafts/64 So, in addition to tweakscale (which does write to the craft file), this ship has Action Groups Extended and Modular Fuel Tanks, without MFT I was getting lots of errors, same for AGEX. I actually think the AGEX data might be bad, causing the ship to fail to load (was testing from clean just to check it out), I edited the craft file on my machine to remove all the agex data and was able to get it to load. Edit: Deleted the original, uploaded the one without the AGEX data, it dropped the file from 4.7mb to 2.2mb. Is there a way to actually update them yet?

That worked great, it detects all those parts now. For tweakscale, I'd suggest just making it a checkbox the uploader needs to check. Same with Hangar Extender, as you can't edit 300m tall rockets without it Mods: New Mod 'Alcor drop module tank' added!!! New Mod 'R&SCapsuledyne' added!!! New Mod 'BfS' added!!! New Mod 'ChargeMeter' added!!! New Mod 'Compact Adapter Kit' added!!! New Mod 'CxAerospace' added!!! New Mod 'Engineer' added!!! New Mod 'GilB9Shuttle_Wings' added!!! New Mod 'GingerCorp' added!!! New Mod 'HoloTape' added!!! New Mod 'Hyomoto' added!!! New Mod 'KerbalStockLauncherOverhaul' added!!! New Mod 'kOS' added!!! New Mod 'NMB' added!!! New Mod 'OblivionAerospace' added!!! New Mod 'RoverScience' added!!! New Mod 'Seadragon' added!!! New Mod 'XanderTek' added!!! New Mod 'z_thing' added!!! Parts: 1 new parts added to Alcor drop module tank 5 new parts added to R&SCapsuledyne 1 new parts added to BfS 1 new parts added to BoxSat alpha 1 new parts added to ChargeMeter 13 new parts added to CxAerospace 1 new parts added to Engineer 6 new parts added to GilB9Shuttle_Wings 3 new parts added to GingerCorp 1 new parts added to HoloTape 1 new parts added to Hyomoto 2 new parts added to KerbalStockLauncherOverhaul 2 new parts added to kOS 2 new parts added to NMB 3 new parts added to OblivionAerospace 1 new parts added to RoverScience 6 new parts added to Seadragon 3 new parts added to XanderTek 3 new parts added to z_thing 40 new parts added to KSO 1 new parts added to Kerbal Foundries 23 new parts added to MagicSmokeIndustries 6 new parts added to ModsByTal 8 new parts added to Romfarer

It added a picture when I uploaded it, but that picture had nothing to do with the craft. I'll add a picture a bit later as well. But that upload is more to test with, being that the v1 of the seadragon mod isn't available anymore, and the newer versions aren't the same parts, it'd be pointless for anyone to try it out without already having those mods. The seadragon mod is also a restricted license, so I can't just host it/reupload it for people wanting to look at the craft. I'll remove it eventually. Question, I assume there's no way to detect tweakscale? That craft would be broken without it, but it's not on the list of mods either. I'm not sure if it actually writes anything to the craft file other than the scale of the parts not being the same as the default parts.

Woot, uploaded, didn't take too long really. http://kerbalx.com/crafts/45 It didn't understand the pod parts, they come from this mod. http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/threads/75074-24-x-Taurus-HCV-3-75-m-Crew-Pod-and-other-parts-v1-2-1-July-22-2014 And the seadragon parts are from v1 of that mod, which was here... ( decoupler13.75, Tank3, Mjolnir, Tank20m, Mastodon) http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/threads/84810-Official-release-of-my-SeaDragon-mod%21 Ohh, looks like I should use that partmapper thing, I'll give it a shot later.

Can you increase the max craft file size to 5mb? This ship is 4.7mb.

Trying not to need a mod for this, although I did try firespitter, the results were not expected. Next up, trying to get them to work as one foot/piston, and if that fails, separate the base and legs.

Ugh, if I can ignore it, why's it an error.... I've been trying to get this to work, http://www.gfycat.com/FlakyLoneGelding I've determined that getting the animation to play all the time means setting up the legs right so the leg module doesn't break. But, I think I've ran into an issue where getting 4 legs to work on 1 part seems impossible, one leg seems fine, but more than that seems not so fine.

A step is missing somewhere: [ERR 02:01:47.568] WheelCollider requires an attached Rigidbody to function.

Woot!, Ion engine and Xenon tank! Well, I made my first 3d object when I was in high school in the early 90s, I owned a copy of of 3d studio release 2 (not max, the original...). I haven't modeled anything since something like Max 1.5/Softimage 3.7 days. I'm a sys admin these days (I love the rack concept!), but I work with people that need to use the different map types daily. The first part of creating the textures, is finding my wacom pen... and then seeing if I can stand paint.net or if I'm going to fork out for the monthly abode service. I sort of want Premier and After Effects, as video editing in Blender was doable, but slower than what I know. Luckily, blender seems to be working fine for me for modeling, that's probably cause I know some stuff, but none of the current generation of programs. But, back to topic, Ion Engines, dreams come true! As a bonus for myself, I've been messing with Blender instead of playing since the BoxSat 0.2 update, so I haven't updated my communication sat yet, so I'll get to do the engines and dishes in 1 go. These are currently procedural parts fitted to the inside of a BoxSat Frame. http://i.imgur.com/sjavnCu.png Camera Boom to see around dishes: http://i.imgur.com/LYAk3Kb.png

MODULE { name = MechJebCore MechJebLocalSettings { MechJebModuleCustomWindowEditor { unlockTechs = flightControl } MechJebModuleSmartASS { unlockTechs = flightControl } MechJebModuleManeuverPlanner { unlockTechs = advFlightControl } MechJebModuleNodeEditor { unlockTechs = advFlightControl } MechJebModuleTranslatron { unlockTechs = advFlightControl } MechJebModuleWarpHelper { unlockTechs = advFlightControl } MechJebModuleAttitudeAdjustment { unlockTechs = advFlightControl } MechJebModuleThrustWindow { unlockTechs = advFlightControl } MechJebModuleRCSBalancerWindow { unlockTechs = advFlightControl } MechJebModuleRoverWindow { unlockTechs = fieldScience } MechJebModuleAscentGuidance { unlockTechs = unmannedTech } MechJebModuleLandingGuidance { unlockTechs = unmannedTech } MechJebModuleSpaceplaneGuidance { unlockTechs = unmannedTech } MechJebModuleDockingGuidance { unlockTechs = advUnmanned } MechJebModuleRendezvousAutopilotWindow { unlockTechs = advUnmanned } MechJebModuleRendezvousGuidance { unlockTechs = advUnmanned } } } just put that in your part config, there's no need to fork mechjeb to make a new part. See this thread for reference: http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/threads/77674-Small-MechJeb-touchscreen-case

Thanks, still needs a bit of work. That animation was a little tricky, they won't hit anything directly below the base, so if you had a squarish ion engine, it wouldn't clip with it, by a less than a cm. Even the top, it never clips with the box on top of it, I'm pretty sure it only clips in one area on the pivot joints for each leg, but I think I got that fixed. (Not a fan of clipping...) In hindsight, I should have made them a little more narrow, as they are now, they overlap with the cover panel just a little when they're extended, I haven't tested them to see if that would actually block you from grabbing it with KAS. I still got to texture them (normal/spec/etc). And mostly, I got to figure out why they work once, and then the retract just pops them to the starting position without the animation, and only the deploy portion is played. Or I can ping-pong them, so they never stop deploying and retracting... neither of which is ideal.

I've been making myself some legs to teach myself blender, etc. http://www.gfycat.com/FlakyLoneGelding

I just reinstalled kOS to check out your script, and then I see this over in the packrat thread... but it doesn't look like you mess around with those mods. Either way, still going to check out your script, as I was attempting to write one of these myself, but was getting completely confused by the seemingly random heading numbers.

Awesome, I'm just getting into RT2, this is perfect timing!

@PART[62cm_BoxSat_ProbeCore_Module] { MODULE { name = kOSProcessor diskSpace = 10000 } } Just save that as boxsat-kos.cfg in the root of the gamedata folder, then delete it if they add it to the next official release.

Ahh, it's cause I was constantly reverting due to playing with kerbcam, so there wasn't a save. After it autosaved it did remember the settings, so sweet!

Sweet, grats on the release. Is there a config file, I'd prefer to default to off and scansat to on myself, so if i can change it for myself, that'd be awesome, either way, thanks, I can live with 2 clicks to get nice looking overlays when I want them.

That new drop down menu, that's pretty sweet.

Actually I just did a pull request for this change in github, hopefully you'll see it there. I also fixed the NFT hollow truss.

@NathanKell You're responses are the primary reason I figured we should move this out the KAS thread, people were discussing licensing, not KAS, just KAS is a hot topic so it sort of grew from there. @ferram4 I did searches, it pretty much seems to stop at the Majiir thread, are there threads that we can link here. If this was discussed 6 months ago (I was on a KSP break then, and was just a lurker/consumer of mods prior), if we can link the threads then let's do that and lock this one, if that's what people feel is best. In hindsight for myself, I wish I had learned about these threads 6 months ago, would have been handy for my job

While that's what I got my into the conversation, it's actually not the cause, the modstats mod (which I have nothing against) seems to have been the catalyst. That thread was locked, the issue appeared as a frustration in the KAS thread, and I responded with my opinions in that thread, but my opinions are more about licensing in general and not directly related to KAS. For me it's just an interesting topic of discussion, which doesn't need to be heated, as it's just peoples opinions. @ferram4 Ahh, I see that now, well, that's why we have discussions, to find the flaws in our opinions. One thing I noticed yesterday after jumping into the discussion, is there doesn't seem to be a list of mods and licenses. The requirement of having a license specified is newer than some of the mods. I sort of have a goal this weekend to see if I can scrap the forums and make a list with licenses, as I think having actual data directly related to the KSP mod scene would be handy with the discussion about licenses. I also wonder how much of this is an issue due to hindsight... by that I mean, no one cared (no license was required, people probably had a lax respect for the default all rights reserved), then we had to care (cause spyware is bad), and then people got to work on competing mods due to licensing reasons. (I'm fine with modstats btw, giving mod devs info should mean better mods, the opt-in vs opt-out is a whole another topic that many people on the planet debate.) It's also interesting to me on a professional level, as the product I work on could have the exact same issue (although with only scripting, no dlls/etc). Another thing I'm attempting but probably failing at, is I'm not attempting to suggest karbonite is better than kethane (heck, it probably wouldn't even exist if kethane did not), it's just those two mods seem to be the at the crux of the licensing issue. I also find it interesting, when looking this up on games that are not KSP, what happens if someone submits a language pack to a restricted licensed mod, but the terms of that weren't clearly defined. Is it now the property of the first mod dev by the nature of the submission, is there an implied right granted to use those changes? How does that work for KSP mods, if I make a patch for More Struts (just an example), and that patch is accepted by the More Struts dev, what's my license to those changes I created? Edit: I need to write faster... so many responses before I could respond to ferram4.

Again, end of discussion for you, that's your opinion, you're stating it like a fact, that people should not discuss issues with licenses cause you said so. And yes, we are aware that the rules of the site say x, this discussion is more about is that the best for the community. In your opinion there's no issue, so not sure why you keep responding other than you don't want people discussing it, which is cool, it's your opinion, but not the end of the discussion.

Did I say mods should die? Perhaps you should read the threads. The Majir thread was responded to by roverdude, roverdude specified his opinion on the licensing issue, and it was: http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/...bution!/page26 So, by looking at Karbonite and Kethane as examples, how did I suggest one should die? Instead, perhaps I was suggesting the restrictive license of kethane is what brought us karbonite, therefore in my opinion, very good for us all.