Jump to content

[1.12.x] ResearchBodies V1.13.0 (15th May 2022)


JPLRepo

Recommended Posts

So i'm done, here is my fork:  [License-violating link removed by moderator]

You can see all changes what i made in this commit: [License-violating link removed by moderator]

And also here is compiled modified version for everyone who want to test my solution:  [License-violating link removed by moderator]

First load will be still slow as always, but next one should be fast as it should be (as without this mod).

Here is changelog:

Quote

- Implemented cache for generated textures. This fixing slow loading of game when change scenes to flight or tracking center.
- Changed how research level 6 code works, now it does not do additional job for create textures and re-apply everything to already researched bodies (please check if this is correctly working for you).
- Added first version of russian translation.

There is few issues what i didn't fix:
- There is no any checks for texture updates, so if you install texture mod or so what will replace planet textures then you have to clear cache manually, it is located in "Kerbal Space Program\saves\Your Save\ResearchBodies".
- There is possible to have some outdated cache files if you load older saves after had discovered planets. Its not major problem, except take some additional HDD space.

I can make PR if author want to include this into mod.

That's all, thank you for attention!

Edited by Snark
Links removed by moderator due to licensing violations
Link to comment
Share on other sites

@AlexALX I gave it a try and it works great! My load times are down from 20 seconds back to about the usual 4 seconds which is fantastic.

In the tracking station I took a look at the various planets I had researched to various degrees and they all look as expected as well.

Much appreciated. :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@MechBFP Grad to hear that!
----
I found small bug in my code, it can create cache for research level 6 textures when loading different saves in 1 game session and they are not needed, so i fixed this.
Also i forgot mention that i disabled applying textures/changes to planets if they already applied before for all research levels. It seems works fine, but needed more tests.

I updated link to new release, its not necessary to update, i just want to provide proper version for other people.

----

Also after some testing in different saves, i discover that textures actually always same for all planets, so maybe then isntead of create cache for each save i can make 1 global cache? I need to think about this later.

----

Oh also i did read license " Refere to the LICENSE files in the Distribution Folder. Parts of this code are ALL RIGHTS RESERVERED and may not be forked, modified or re-distributed without my express written permission. "

So i need to remove all this stuff now? Just say what i need to do, i don't want have problems with that. And yea, i actually should saw this before create fork, so sorry...

Edited by AlexALX
Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 hours ago, AlexALX said:

@MechBFP Grad to hear that!
----
I found small bug in my code, it can create cache for research level 6 textures when loading different saves in 1 game session and they are not needed, so i fixed this.
Also i forgot mention that i disabled applying textures/changes to planets if they already applied before for all research levels. It seems works fine, but needed more tests.

I updated link to new release, its not necessary to update, i just want to provide proper version for other people.

----

Also after some testing in different saves, i discover that textures actually always same for all planets, so maybe then isntead of create cache for each save i can make 1 global cache? I need to think about this later.

----

Oh also i did read license " Refere to the LICENSE files in the Distribution Folder. Parts of this code are ALL RIGHTS RESERVERED and may not be forked, modified or re-distributed without my express written permission. "

So i need to remove all this stuff now? Just say what i need to do, i don't want have problems with that. And yea, i actually should saw this before create fork, so sorry...

Unfortunately it probably should be taken off so as not to incur the wrath of author JPLRepo who may not have noticed as of yet as he hasn't been pinged.  If you've removed all the ARR code then you are probably okay :)

Also, why not submit as a PR if it works?  Peace.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, theJesuit said:

Unfortunately it probably should be taken off so as not to incur the wrath of author JPLRepo who may not have noticed as of yet as he hasn't been pinged.  If you've removed all the ARR code then you are probably okay :)

Also, why not submit as a PR if it works?  Peace.

Its difficult to understand where is ARR code and where is not (without looking inside all files), but for file what i changed its actually MIT i think so its should be ok to change it. In any case its temporary repository. I want to hear official answer from JPLRepo about this changes and i should to do next. And until that everything will stay as it is. So feel free to test my version to see if its working for your well.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

45 minutes ago, AlexALX said:

Its difficult to understand where is ARR code and where is not (without looking inside all files), but for file what i changed its actually MIT i think so its should be ok to change it. In any case its temporary repository. I want to hear official answer from JPLRepo about this changes and i should to do next. And until that everything will stay as it is. So feel free to test my version to see if its working for your well.

The issue isn't that you might not have changed the ARR code it's that you are distributing it.  

Edited by theJesuit
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 1/30/2018 at 11:02 PM, AlexALX said:

So i'm done, here is my fork:

 

And also here is compiled modified version for everyone who want to test my solution:

First load will be still slow as always, but next one should be fast as it should be (as without this mod).

Here is changelog:

There is few issues what i didn't fix:
- There is no any checks for texture updates, so if you install texture mod or so what will replace planet textures then you have to clear cache manually, it is located in "Kerbal Space Program\saves\Your Save\ResearchBodies".
- There is possible to have some outdated cache files if you load older saves after had discovered planets. Its not major problem, except take some additional HDD space.

I can make PR if author want to include this into mod.

That's all, thank you for attention!

Please remove your fork from github. and please refer to the license:
Refer to the LICENSE files in the Distribution Folder. Parts of this code are ALL RIGHTS RESERVED and may not be forked, modified or re-distributed without my express written permission.
(Comments in code files indicate which license applies)

I'm very angry when people don't follow license agreements. You could have PMd me and discussed this first.
The previous discussions I indicated you could submit a PR only. or do your own version - but that did not imply you can make it public and redistribute it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'll add this too... don't bother reporting bugs to me until this github branch and redistribution is gone...
I won't support it, and how do I know which one people are using when they report problems?

Sorry but this is why people shouldn't just go making forks and redistributing other peoples work regardless of what the license is.

It's just bad form, bad karma, and gets modders upset.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, AlexALX said:

Its difficult to understand where is ARR code and where is not (without looking inside all files), but for file what i changed its actually MIT i think so its should be ok to change it. In any case its temporary repository.

Sorry, @AlexALX, I know you mean well, but you're really not allowed to violate licenses.  The fact that JPLRepo's thread clearly states that some portions are ARR means that no, you can't just fork it.  The only way you'd be allowed to fork and redistribute is if you go through the whole thing and find any parts that are ARR and do not include them in your fork.

Yes, it's hard to find, but since it's a legal obligation, you're required to do it if you want to fork.

It doesn't matter that the file you changed is MIT.  You still are distributing a mod that contains ARR content from someone else without their permission, and therefore you're not allowed to do this.

For your information, the particular file that is ARR in JPLRepo's mod is Observatory.cs.  You're not allowed to copy that file or include it in your fork.  If you can eliminate that file, and verify that there aren't any other files marked ARR, then you're fine.  However, until and unless you do that, your github fork is breaking the license on that software.

Accordingly, I have deleted all links to your github repository from your post above.  Please do not post any more links to license-violating content.  Also, please remove Observatory.cs from your github repository, since it's violating the license agreement merely by existing there, since "ARR" doesn't allow copying/hosting/redistributing.

I'm sorry for the inconvenience.  You've clearly put some work into this, and you're clearly trying to help people.  However, you have to understand that you are legally required to abide by licenses, and you need to respect mod authors' wishes as expressed in those licenses.

Thank you for your understanding.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm more than happy to entertain a pull request to turn off the planet functionality - which I assume is what you did, without looking at it.
But then - that functionality should be turned on or off via a setting.
But you can't fork the ARR part of the project. So you probably need to work with it privately and then submit your change to me privately.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@JPLRepo
Ok so i removed my fork, sorry for make you angry regarding license violation. Actually its first time for me when some MIT project includes ARR parts.

But you also makes me extremely angry to not even try to understand why this slow down happens in first place. Instead of say "this is impossible to fix" you at least could look whats wrong with this code, but instead you actually ignore everyone who have this problem. And also you even didn't read my this message:

All this makes me feel very sad and disappointing as well. My repo before contains improved version of code what is from this message with some additional changes for make it work properly.

I can repeat that i didn't remove any functional from mod, i just implement cache for generated textures what actually do this slow down and slight improved code to not doing this jobs in all time when its already applied. That's all.
 

Quote

It's just bad form, bad karma, and gets modders upset.

And how then to call situation, when mod author even didn't want to try understand issue and find ways to fix it? And ignore everyone because he think "its impossible or very hard"? I think its even much worse than bad form/bad karma. And if someone actually do fix and then don't even take a few minutes to read what exactly was wrong.

Here is actual change log what i think nobody read as well:

Quote

- Implemented cache for generated textures. This fixing slow loading of game when change scenes to flight or tracking center.
- Changed how research level 6 code works, now it does not do additional job for create textures and re-apply everything to already researched bodies (please check if this is correctly working for you).
- Added first version of russian translation.
- Disabled applying textures/changes to planets if they already applied before for all research levels. It seems works fine, but needed more tests.

For now i saved my work locally and won't share it anymore.

Next question is - do you actually want to include my changes in this addon or not, i still can make PR. But i can't create private repository on github because its paid, so this mean i can't create PR without fork, and this cannot be done because of ARR, great. Also i can't fork without including particular files (as this files will be still in history), so actually your license break ability to make PR for those who may fork only for that reason. Tell me next time to not try help people.

So i'll not do anything with it anymore until get proper answer.

ps after all this stuff happen, right now all in my minds is about removing all my messages and code because i'm very upset, because mod author actually even don't want try to understand what was wrong in his own creation, and worry about license more than look at what actually was changed, but i'll not do this as i still want help other people (somewhere deep in my soul).

pss And it seems like people in this thread more likes messages against my fault of license violation instead of actual fix, which made me even more upset. Whats wrong with people...

Edited by AlexALX
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi @AlexALX,

I'm sorry that you're unhappy.  Clearly you've put effort into trying to be helpful, and clearly you mean well, and I'm sure it must feel aggravating when it seems like your attempts to help have been unappreciated, ignored, or rejected.

Except that none of those things have happened.  You haven't been unappreciated; you haven't been ignored; and you haven't been rejected.  I can't blame you if it seems that way, but it's not.  That's not what's going on here.

This is getting kind of off topic for the thread, so I'll put most of my response in a spoiler section.

Spoiler

To be clear:  the entire modding community runs on the backs of helpful, friendly people who put in their personal time and effort to try to make other people's lives better, purely out of the  goodness of their hearts.  That's a good description of mod authors.  And, as far as I can tell, that's a good description of you, too, at least based on what I've seen thus far.  You put in time and effort to try to help, so thank you for that!  The modding community needs all the helpful, altruistic people it can get.

However, due to the nature of the system, there are certain ways that things need to be done.  Many of these ways aren't immediately obvious to the newcomer; they're the result of how interactions evolve between modders and mod users.  What has happened here is that without meaning to, you accidentally crossed some big red lines, in a way that's likely to cause big problems for the mod author.  That's why you got the response you did.  The main thing to understand is that it's not personal-- it's just a reflection of certain practical realities that mod authors/maintainers have to deal with.

I'll address your comments point by point:

5 hours ago, AlexALX said:

sorry for make you angry regarding license violation

Bear in mind that the "license violation" thing isn't, itself, what matters to the mod author.  It's important to understand that licenses are a means to an end, generally not an end in themselves.

When a mod author puts a license requirement that prevents modifying redistributed copies, it's because it's really important to them, for good practical reasons, that nobody but themselves releases a new/different version of the mod.  This isn't a case of JPLRepo being weird or unusually demanding-- this is a common problem that lots of mod authors face.  In fact, it's so common that when you see a mod that has a restrictive license like that... it's very often precisely because the mod author has gotten badly bitten by people distributing modified versions, and has reacted to that by locking down the mod.

(For example, my own mods used to be MIT-licensed... until I got bitten by some well-meaning person who decided to distribute modified versions.  Unfortunately, that forced me to lock them all down afterwards, so that most of my mods now have a license that prohibits distributing modified versions.  This did not make my users happy, and I'm really sorry about that, but I was basically forced into it, because the only alternative-- i.e. not locking it down-- would mean that modding would become an unpleasant burden to me and I'd stop modding entirely, and then everybody loses.  Mod users may not like it that the mod is locked down... but they'd like it even less if the mod died completely.  And it's not just me, either.  I've heard this story over and over, from many mod authors.  It's one of those "this is why we can't have nice things" unfortunate facts of life.  )

5 hours ago, AlexALX said:

But you also makes me extremely angry to not even try to understand why this slow down happens in first place. Instead of say "this is impossible to fix" you at least could look whats wrong with this code, but instead you actually ignore everyone who have this problem.

Sorry, but you're completely off base there.  That's a really inappropriate way to talk to a mod author.  Because, with all due respect, you don't have the faintest clue what you're talking about.

Essentially, what the above statement is implying is the following:

  • "I'm entitled to be angry, because the mod author owes me and the users something and he's not giving it to us."
  • "The mod author must have plenty of time and energy to fix this, so if they're not fixing it, it's because they're deliberately ignoring anyone who brought up the problem."

Both of which are complete nonsense.

First, mod authors don't owe you anything.  At all.  I mean that very precisely literally.  They owe you nothing.  They don't owe you new versions.  They don't owe you bug fixes.  They don't owe you to read anything you've written.  And why is that?  It's because they have put in lots of hours of hard work, for free, to give you shiny new toys, for free, without asking for anything in return.

It's true that most mod authors, such as JPLRepo, are friendly helpful people who want to help their users.  That's not surprising-- if they weren't that kind of person, they wouldn't be doing all that unpaid tedious work to provide a mod to all those people in the first place, right?  So they do listen to users, and they do take suggestions well, and they do work to improve their mods.

But they do that simply because they're nice people, and not because they actually owe the users anything at all.  And the users really should appreciate that.  If a mod author does something nice for you, be grateful.  And if the mod author doesn't, then you have no right to expect anything.  If you don't like the experience of using a mod, then don't use the mod.  It's that simple.

Second, mod authors have busy lives IRL and it's not their job to maintain the mod.  It's a hobby.  Mod authors are just doing this for the fun of it.  They have day jobs that take up their time.  They have family, loved ones, IRL commitments that have to take a priority over modding.

And that means that when something comes up with the mod and the mod author can't respond right away... well, that's just how it works, and the mod users just have to be patient, and if they don't want to be patient, they don't have to use the mod.  Certainly no mod user ever has a right to demand "I want to have this issue fixed RIGHT NOW".  You don't know how busy the mod author is in their life.  You just have to wait.

So it's incredibly inappropriate to say that a mod author has "ignored" anything.  All you can say is, they haven't addressed the issue.  That doesn't necessarily mean they don't care, or that they aren't listening to people.  It likely just means that they're too busy with their day job, trying to earn a living, support their families, go to school, or whatever, so that they simply haven't had the bandwidth to address the matter.  And it's really inappropriate to expect anything more than that.

Give them time.  They may address the issue tomorrow.  Or in a week.  Or in a year.  Or maybe never.  And whatever it is, is all you have a right to expect, because you're not the one who's putting in many hours of precious free time, unpaid, to give people things for free.  Let them live their lives, okay?

5 hours ago, AlexALX said:

And also you even didn't read my this message:

Nonsense.  You have no way of knowing what JPLRepo has or hasn't read, and you also have no right to expect that it get read on a given timetable.  It may be that he read it, and didn't have the time to respond.  Or maybe he was busy and hadn't had time to read it, yet.  Don't make assumptions about other people's lives.  They may not have as much time to look at a particular issue as you do.

 

5 hours ago, AlexALX said:

My repo before contains improved version of code what is from this message with some additional changes for make it work properly.

I can repeat that i didn't remove any functional from mod, i just implement cache for generated textures what actually do this slow down and slight improved code to not doing this jobs in all time when its already applied. That's all.

I'm not JPLRepo and therefore can't speak for him, of course.  But I am a modder, and I know a lot of other modders, and I can tell you what my reaction to this would have been, in his place.

No matter how brilliant your solution, no matter how much hard work you put in to bring it to people, no matter how much time you spent explaining everything in the thread:  if I were the author of the mod and I saw this from you, here's how I would read it:

Quote

My repo blah blah blah modified version blah blah blah

...and I'd basically stop reading at that point.  Because to a modder, having other users releasing modified copies will make my life a living hell.

Remember all that stuff I said about modders doing all this wonderful, hard, thankless, unpaid work to give people shiny toys for free?  Well, ask yourself:  if it's so hard and thankless, why do they do it?  The answer is simple:  Because they enjoy doing so.  And if anything happens that makes the modding stop being enjoyable for them... they'll stop.  And then everyone loses.

And having 3rd parties release modified copies of the mod really, really causes problems for modders, and makes it less enjoyable, and see where I'm going with this?

If you don't understand why a 3rd party releasing a modified version can be such a hassle to the original author, I honestly can't blame you.  It's not something that's obvious to someone who doesn't release software for a living, or who isn't a "published" modder themselves.  I've seen this kind of situation pop up all the time-- you're not the first person to make this mistake.  It's not because you're inconsiderate or stupid or anything, it's just that this is a really easy mistake to make.  Just, please understand that it's a thing, okay?  And if you'd like to understand why it's a thing, let me know and I'm happy to explain-- but perhaps best not to do it in this thread, because I've said enough words here already and we're off topic.

I get the impression that you're an enthusiastic, helpful person who really wants to improve people's experience, and you're willing to put in the hard work to make that happen.  That's great, and I'd love to encourage that.  But if you really want to help, it's important to know how to help without unintentionally causing problems.  I'll happily talk that over with you, if you're interested.  It's not hard-- there are just a few basic points to keep in mind.  :)

6 hours ago, AlexALX said:

And how then to call situation, when mod author even didn't want to try understand issue and find ways to fix it?

I'd call that situation "you, completely misunderstanding the situation".  Again:  First, the mod author doesn't owe you anything, so for example, he doesn't owe you trying to understand the situation at all unless he feels like it.  Second, you don't actually know that the mod author doesn't want to try to understand, and you have zero evidence that he's "ignoring" anyone.  All you know is that the mod author hasn't addressed it yet.  Because mod authors have IRL responsibilities, and so it's perfectly reasonable if the mod has to wait until the mod author has the time and inclination to look into things.

6 hours ago, AlexALX said:

I think its even much worse than bad form/bad karma.

Really?  I mean, seriously?

Let's be clear what the mod author is doing, here, like any mod author:

  • putting in lots of hard work, for free
  • to give shiny toys, for free
  • to total strangers
  • many of whom repay this favor by yelling at him and insisting that he stop everything else to give them what they demand, right now, regardless of what else he may have to be doing in his life

...that?  That is what you're calling "worse than bad form"?

Again:  Being helpful is great.  Mod authors want to be helpful, and in general they do welcome help.  But you can't expect them to address things quickly (because they're busy).  And if you do something to make their lives miserable (like publishing your own, modified copy of a mod), then you can't expect them to welcome that-- even if you meant well, as I'm sure you do.

6 hours ago, AlexALX said:

And if someone actually do fix and then don't even take a few minutes to read what exactly was wrong.

You have zero evidence that that's what happened here.  You're assuming.  And frankly, it's a pretty insulting assumption.

I know what I would have done, if I saw something come up like that for one of my mods:  I'd see it, I'd think "gosh, that sounds interesting, I should look at that when I have time", and then I'd go back to my day job that keeps me very busy, because that needs to come first because it's what I buy my groceries with.  And then, at some later time that is compatible with my schedule-- which might be soon, or might be not-- then I'd look at it.

 

6 hours ago, AlexALX said:

For now i saved my work locally and won't share it anymore.

Why is that?  I'm sad to hear that.  It sounds like you have a great idea, and have done the hard work to make it function.  Clearly you're a person who likes to help people, or you wouldn't have made that effort in the first place.  Also, clearly, your work is welcome, because JPLRepo has said that he welcomes it:

14 hours ago, JPLRepo said:

I'm more than happy to entertain a pull request to turn off the planet functionality - which I assume is what you did, without looking at it.
But then - that functionality should be turned on or off via a setting.

^ There.  That, right there.  You've made a lot of accusations that supposedly JPLRepo "hasn't bothered to read what you wrote"... but this post of his pretty clearly demonstrates that he has read it, so you should be happy about that, right?

Not only has he read it, he's even responded well and indicates that he'd welcome the change.

So that sounds wonderful.  In fact, it's even better for the users, if that happens, than if you forked your own repo-- because he's offering you the chance for your work to actually be part of the official version of the mod, that everyone downloads.  Which means you can help all users of the mod, not just people who happen to see your fork.

That's the absolute best-case win-win wonderful scenario.  If you're motivated by wanting to solve problems and help people-- and that's my impression, you seem like a nice person to me-- then you should be thrilled at this.  So why are you unhappy, and contemplating quitting?

(And may I also say, that for a person who's been accusing JPLRepo of not reading what you've written... it kinda feels like you're not reading what he wrote, here.)  :wink:

6 hours ago, AlexALX said:

do you actually want to include my changes in this addon or not, i still can make PR.

Well, he just said he did, so I think it's safe to say that the answer to that is "yes".

 

6 hours ago, AlexALX said:

But i can't create private repository on github because its paid, so this mean i can't create PR without fork, and this cannot be done because of ARR, great. Also i can't fork without including particular files (as this files will be still in history), so actually your license break ability to make PR for those who may fork only for that reason.

Now there's an interestingly difficult chicken-and-egg problem.  You've raised a sound, practical problem.  I don't know myself, offhand, what the answer would be (need to get back to my own day job, here), but it's certainly a valid practical question.  Probably the best thing to do would be to ask JPLRepo about it and see if he has any thoughts on the matter.

Just remember that the tone needs to be "Hey, I'd like to help with a PR request as you suggested, but I've got this practical problem, what can I do?"  You know, as one friendly person to another, trying to help out.  If it's in the middle of an angry complaint, it makes people less likely to listen, because why should they?

6 hours ago, AlexALX said:

So i'll not do anything with it anymore until get proper answer.

Yes, that sounds reasonable.  That does appear to be a pretty important question that would need answering.

 

6 hours ago, AlexALX said:

i'm very upset, because mod author actually even don't want try to understand what was wrong in his own creation, and worry about license more than look at what actually was changed

Yes, that's very understandable.  If I were in your shoes, I'd probably be pretty upset, too.  However, I do hope you can understand that the situation isn't what you think it is, and you're getting upset at things that aren't actually the case.

Never assume that a mod author is "ignoring" you-- it just that they're busy people who have to do other, more important things than modding (like do their day jobs), so you can't have any expectations about when a mod author will do something.

And, second, it's not "worrying about the license" that they care about-- it's that they don't want there to be modified copies floating around out there, because that causes lots of future hassles for them.

And, third, it's not that they're worried about the license more than looking at what's changed-- it's just that looking at what's changed takes a lot of their time so they can't necessarily get to it right away.

That's all that's going on, here.  It's not personal.  It's just a case of a busy mod author who needs to ensure that they can continue modding in the future.

6 hours ago, AlexALX said:

but i'll not do this as i still want help other people (somewhere deep in my soul)

That's good news, I'm glad to hear it.  I hope you continue to want to help people.  The community needs folks like that.  :)

 

6 hours ago, AlexALX said:

And it seems like people in this thread more likes messages against my fault of license violation instead of actual fix, which made me even more upset. Whats wrong with people...

Well, there's nothing wrong with them, per se.  They just have a different set of problems to face than you do, because they have different lives.  So naturally they have different priorities.  Doesn't mean those priorities are wrong.

In my experience, most people are friendly and reasonable.  (Especially people who, like mod authors, have demonstrated that they enjoy doing hard work to help others.)  So when I see someone like that doing something that makes no sense to me, instead of saying "what's wrong with that person?", I try to ask myself "okay, that's not what I would expect, I wonder what's the reason behind that and how I can understand it better?"

In this case, it all comes down to the fact that you made a modified repo and posted it.  That's a huge deal to a modder, and it pretty much drowns out everything else that may be going on-- the top priority has to be to stop that, and stop it as quick as humanly possible, before looking at anything else.

Perhaps an analogy would work best:

Suppose you live in a house.  It's your house, your space, you've got everything in it arranged as best you can.  It's not perfect, because you're busy and you don't have the time to make everything in your house perfectly arranged all the time-- for example, "hmm, I'd like to reorganize my kitchen, but I don't have time to do that right now because I have to go to work."

And then one day you come home and find a stranger in your kitchen, who says:  "Hi there, you don't know me, but I looked in through the window and saw that your kitchen isn't perfectly organized.  So I managed to jam open a window to get inside, and now I've rearranged your kitchen for you.  Look, see, it's more efficient now!  See, all the plates are next to the--"

Tell me, honestly.  At that point, what's your top priority?  Is it going to be to "listen to this stranger in my kitchen to find out what his ideas are about how to improve it"?  No, it's going to be there's someone in my kitchen, doing stuff to my stuff.  That's the elephant in the room.  It doesn't even matter if the stranger is right, or whether they've actually improved things-- maybe they even did stuff that you would have done yourself, when you have time.  But your number 1 priority is going to be calling 911 and getting this person out of your kitchen, because this is not how things are done.

Now imagine if the stranger is complaining "gosh, you're all hung up about my coming into your kitchen and fixing things, and you're not even listening to how I've improved stuff, what's wrong with people?"  It's a situation that's unlikely to find a receptive audience.  :wink:

(And it's not even necessarily the stranger's fault.  Maybe the stranger comes from a different country with a very different culture, where people wander in and out of folks' kitchens all the time, and simply doesn't understand that that's not how things work, here.  But from your perspective as the homeowner, addressing the stranger's cultural differences isn't going matter until you've secured your house.)

On the other hand:  suppose that this really is a genuinely friendly, helpful stranger who simply wants to help you improve your kitchen.  What could the stranger have done in a way that would have worked much better?  Well, it would have been something like this:  stay out of the kitchen, but instead approach you and say "hi, I've noticed some issues with your kitchen when I was passing by, and I've thought about how it could be made better.  Here are some suggestions/plans about how to make it better.  If you like, I could even do it for you, sometime when you're around."  That way, it's purely an offer of help, which you could accept when you have time, rather than taking matters out of your hands.

The analogy's not perfect about the details-- software isn't a kitchen, and you can't fork a room-- but it captures the general emotional situation involved, and it's about the best I can do to explain why people react the way they do.

But what it boils down to is this:  Your work is appreciated-- but unfortunately, the way you've done it causes problems, for practical reasons that aren't necessarily obvious to the newcomer.

Fortunately that's easily fixable, and it has already been explained to you-- politely, by the person for whom you were causing trouble, who's being really nice about it-- how you can make a simple change to how you're doing things that will let everyone win:

Please don't publish your own fork with the fix.  Instead, submit a pull request for the fix to the mod author's repo.

^ There.  That's it.  That's all it is.  That's all that's going on, here.

It's understandable that this may seem like a little, tiny, minor detail to you ("what difference does it make?"), but I assure you it makes a big difference to mod authors.  It's the difference between "make their life a living hell" and "being really helpful and making their life easier."  :wink:

Anyway, I'm sorry you're upset, and I do hope you feel better.  Clearly you have good motivations for helping the modding community, and it would be a shame for the community to lose that.

 

In closing:  @JPLRepo, there's an interesting practical difficulty that AlexALX has raised, regarding creating a pull request.  How is it technically possible for him (or anyone) to do that without violating your license?

6 hours ago, AlexALX said:

But i can't create private repository on github because its paid, so this mean i can't create PR without fork, and this cannot be done because of ARR, great. Also i can't fork without including particular files (as this files will be still in history), so actually your license break ability to make PR for those who may fork only for that reason.

^ This.  Sounds like he's willing to try a pull request, but doesn't know how to work around the license issue.  Any suggestions?

Thanks,
Snark

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@AlexALX I’m not going to go into it; anger etc or arguing; licenses etc; I’ll just say everyone has to respect the wishes of mod authors who give their time freely and license agreements. I’m sorry you feel I was not interested or saying it was too hard. I feel there has been a communication issue; given clearly from your posts that English is not your first language.

But all that said and done. Contributions to any of my mods are welcome. You see I don’t have a lot of spare, free time. Maintaining my mods is something I do in my free time for free. And therefore must come after my paid work and family. So I don’t have a lot of time to investigate things immediately (hours) after it is asked. It takes time.

i like the sound of caching and appreciate the free time you have put into the mod. if you can send me a zip of your code changes (via PM) then I can check it out and look to put into the mod. Just don’t expect it to be tomorrow. If you still wish to see it in the mod. 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

@SnarkThank you for your time for create so veeeery long answer, i did read it completely and really grateful for that. You indeed made me feel better. Thank you. I'll put few things to spoiler as its off-topic for last time. This spoiler mostly for snark.

Spoiler

First of all, i'm also mod developer, but in other games. So i can understand parts about modified version of mod what some people may share. In my case we (its a team) just strictly specified that we don't support any modded version of our mod, so they must ask for author of this exact modded version. It actually solve all our problems as we just redirect them if its problem caused by modded version (and of course any modded version should have own name so we can determine that). So what i want to say, actually problem about modded versions can be solved in other ways instead of locking it.

Now back about situation with what happens here. Lets begin from start. I want you to understand why i'm was so angry.

I come in this thread around 2 months ago with reporting about this issue with slow loading.

On 27.11.2017 at 2:33 PM, AlexALX said:

Hello, after i installed this mod loading scenes is much slower (in ~2-3 times), for example when i'm launching vessel or open tracking center (loading screen). Does this normal or something wrong? Can i speedup loading times somehow?

And after 2 weeks as don't got any answer i created issue on github and again asked:
 

On 13.12.2017 at 8:01 PM, AlexALX said:

I hope someone can help with that, i created bug report https://github.com/JPLRepo/ResearchBodies/issues/30

Its really annoying to wait 20-40 seconds for launch vessel or open tracking center when without this mod this happens for few seconds.

And in answer i got next:

On 13.12.2017 at 9:26 PM, JPLRepo said:

Yup. It is simply the way the mod works.. which is constrained by the way KSP works and loads. And is further exacerbated by the visual enhancement mods you have installed such as scatterer and EVE. There is not a lot I can do about that sorry.

So he clearly said that he will not do anything about that. I asked few additional questions, if you want, you can read it started from this point:
 

I didn't got any answers after that for one month, so i decided again remind about this problem.
 

On 28.01.2018 at 10:20 PM, AlexALX said:

@mod developers

Can you please explain where is code what affecting loading time? I mean makes loading extremly slow, i want to look into it and maybe make some workaround to prevend this. Maybe even make some options to disable part of mod just for make it loading again at normal speed. It could be helpfull if you can at least tell lines of code in files. Thank you.

In answer i got:

On 29.01.2018 at 12:04 AM, JPLRepo said:

The solution would be to make changes to the stock game code. so the mod does not have to do what it does to work around how the stock game code works.

Ok i asked additional questions and got next answer:

On 29.01.2018 at 12:58 AM, JPLRepo said:

I am a KSP developer.... it is not an issue with the stock code. and there is no likelihood of rewriting a large chunk of the stock code just for what this mod does. Doing that - may as well make the mod stock.

But that is not something I have anything to do with and not something I am paid to do.

The code is on github link in the opening post.

And later:

On 29.01.2018 at 1:34 AM, AlexALX said:

Ok, i didn't saw your edited message when wrote previous comment. So you want to say that there is 100% no any other way to do this to speed up loading without modify stock code? If so, is there at least opportunity to disable/enable this mod in real-time, for example in KSP before scene change? So if i'm want just to test some craft or so i can start without this slow loading, and when i want go out of the kerbnit SOI then enable it. Or something like this. If it also possible to load it even without scene change it will just amazing (even with hang or so). And another thing - what exact feature do this slow down? Because i can separate mod to few parts: hiding planets, modify planet surface (gray textures), contracts. So if this is caused for example because of gray textures for planets then i can live without this feature if it will improve loading times.

And last thing - i can make russian translation for this mod, so if i'll do that, i can make PR into github?

And got answer:

On 29.01.2018 at 1:39 AM, JPLRepo said:

no there isn't... it already does what it does on scene change as appropriate... however, disabling and enabling... not really... the planet changes possibly. but not the mapnodes changes. not without considerable difficulty.
the slow down - is because when the scene changes it must apply all the changes to the celestialbodies and the mapnodes. as I just said, it's possible. There already is debug code that does all this already that is not available in the released dll. but can be enabled with a compile directive.
PRs can be submitted to the Dev branch.

So technically he said that there is no way to do this without disabling part with planet textures (as i understand). But of course its possible to make this feature to enable/disable, and in this part he is right.

So later i take everything in my hands and started to find solution myself. At the beginning i search way to disable texture changes for planets, but later i realized that i can implement cache for generated textures, what i actually did. After that i wrote about this in this message:

As you can see here - I clearly said that i did fix without removing/disabling any mod feature. Next step of course was my fault - creating fork and share here modified version, for what I apologize.

And next actual answer from JPLRepo was:

17 hours ago, JPLRepo said:

I'm more than happy to entertain a pull request to turn off the planet functionality - which I assume is what you did, without looking at it.
But then - that functionality should be turned on or off via a setting.
But you can't fork the ARR part of the project. So you probably need to work with it privately and then submit your change to me privately.

If you read carefully he said next "to turn off the planet functionality - which I assume is what you did", so in this case he actually didn't read my message about that i didn't disable any mod feature and did another fix. So in this case this sentences what you wrote is not valid:

Quote

Nonsense.  You have no way of knowing what JPLRepo has or hasn't read, and you also have no right to expect that it get read on a given timetable.  It may be that he read it, and didn't have the time to respond.  Or maybe he was busy and hadn't had time to read it, yet.  Don't make assumptions about other people's lives.  They may not have as much time to look at a particular issue as you do.

You have zero evidence that that's what happened here.  You're assuming.  And frankly, it's a pretty insulting assumption.

So in this case i was not assuming, its a conclusions from his message.

Of course there can be some misunderstanding as my english is not first language, but i can understand almost everything, its just my bad grammar when i'm answering back. And i think that's all what i wanted to say. Thank you again for this long message, and last part about kitchen was very funny, i even laughed)

While writing another long message JPLRepo already answered about how i can submit my changes, so i'm going to do that in any case. But still @JPLRepo is there actually proper way to do this via PR on github without license violation? Its still will be better for everyone else who might have same situation as me and want to do this properly. Also i prefer this way because of mention author name in commits (as one of contributors, this is generally part of github).

ps zip was send to PM, so now everything is up to JPLRepo, of course when he will have free time.

Edited by AlexALX
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

Apologies if this has been reported before, but I did not see anything looking back over the last few pages of the thread.  I also realize JPLRepo has requested that bug reports be posted on Github, but I do not have an account so if someone would be so kind as to pass this along there, I would appreciate it.

I recently started a new install using Research Bodies with the Outer Planets mod pack and in setting "Planet Visibility" to Hard, Sarnus is visible but Minmus is not (as listed in the configuration).  I originally noticed this is a heavily modded install but was able to reproduce in a separate install with only Research Bodies and OPM and their dependencies.

OS:  Linux Mint 17.3

KSP version 1.3.1

Game Data Contents (version numbers in parentheses where available):

  • Spoiler

     

    • Contract Configurator (1.23.3)
    • Contract Packs
    • Squad (KSP 1.3.1)
    • CTTP
    • CustomBarnKit (1.1.16)
    • Kopernicus (1.3.1.3)
    • ModularFlightIntegrator (1.2.4)
    • OPM (1.2.3)
    • RepoSoftTech (1.9.5)

     

     

Reproduction Notes:

  • Spoiler

     

    • Beginning with a new KSP install and above listed mods
    • Start new game
    • Keep default settings with the following exceptions:
      • Research Bodies Difficulty Tab:  Change planet visibility to Hard
      • Research Bodies Difficulty Tab:  Enable Observatory available at T/S level 1
        • To make reproduction easier (also occurs when this is not enabled)

     

      •  

Attempted Workaround (unsuccessful):

  • Spoiler

     

    • Exited KSP
    • Edited persistence file with following changes
      • body = Sarnus
                        isResearched = True          -> False
                        researchState = 100          -> 0
                        ignore = True                         -> False
                        ContractsWeight = 30
    • On reloading KSP, the changes are reset to the original values listed on the left and Sarnus is still visible

     

     

Another Thought:

  • Spoiler

     

    • I noticed in the OPM_ResearchBodies.cfg, there was a block of code that says:
      • IGNORE
            {
                body = Sarnus
            }
      • IGNORELEVELS
            {
                // body = easy normal medium hard
                Sarnus = true true true true
                ...
            }
    • Could this be the culprit (although it doesn't explain why it replaces Minmus)?

     

     

Please find the following available on DropBox at https://www.dropbox.com/sh/sojfzq6xurmerrp/AADbFwFb6SMvVMV4epiuYE5Pa?dl=0:

Spoiler

 

  • KSP.log
  • Player.log
  • ResearchBodies.log
  • persistent.sfs
  • screenshot0.png (Settings menu)
  • screenshot1.png (1st KSC view)*
  • screenshot2.png (Observatory view with Sarnus information)
  • OPM_ResearchBodies.cfg

*I noticed another strange thing that 'may' be Research bodies related and that is when you go to the KSC the 1st time (or tracking station) Wernher's portrait is superimposed over where Gene normally appears.

 

 

Edited by BlkBltChemie
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Following up on my previous post. I changed the OPM config to not ignore Sarnus (changed all values to false) then re-edited my persistence file and everything is now behaving as expected. Sarnus is no longer visible so everthing is good to go.  Looks like this issue is on OPM's side not Research Bodies.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, BlkBltChemie said:

Following up on my previous post. I changed the OPM config to not ignore Sarnus (changed all values to false) then re-edited my persistence file and everything is now behaving as expected. Sarnus is no longer visible so everthing is good to go.  Looks like this issue is on OPM's side not Research Bodies.

3 pages back.

 

Edited by Galileo
Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 hours ago, Galileo said:

3 pages back.

 

Thanks!  I tend to agree, this is something that made me a bit reluctant to try Research Bodies as we did discover most (if not all) of the planets and many moons without ever going into space.  Nevertheless, I am enjoying the discovery mechanic so far and it ties in nicely with Kerbal Construction Time.  Thanks again for explaining the design choice. 

Actually, that gives me an idea for my next playthrough - having all the larger planets (maybe not Dres, Plock, or Moho) visible and all but the largest moons invisible to be slightly more realistic/historical. Hmm, thanks JPLRepo and predecessors for making Research Bodies so easy to customize!

 

Edited by BlkBltChemie
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi there!

Can I modify a save file to hide planets that are mistakenly visible?

I have tried to change these lines from:

            BODY
            {
                body = Minmus
                isResearched = False
                researchState = 0
                ignore = False
                ContractsWeight = 23
            }

into the following:

            BODY
            {
                body = Minmus
                isResearched = True
                researchState = 100
                ignore = True
                ContractsWeight = 23
            }

But it seems to return to the top config directly in the game and when saving. Any ideas?

 

Edit: oopsie, I mean I changed isResearched from True to False, of course..

Edited by Katten
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...