Jump to content

[1.0.5] TAC Life Support v0.11.2.1 [12Dec]


Recommended Posts

7 minutes ago, Table said:

It works perfectly fine with 1.1.2, although 1.1.2 is very unstable...

A vintage table is sometimes unstable.

OK, I've got nothing more than that.  But ... what?


Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, danfarnsy said:

Okay, it's time for this mod to pick up a caretaker.

I volunteer as tribute. I'm going to have a steep learning curve, so it's not going to be updated quickly, but I hate to see this great mod die this slow death. There are even some good ways to improve it, starting by borrowing some background processing features from @ShotgunNinja's Kerbalism. Balance of resources, integrating other mods' ISRU channels, integrating well into Realism Overhaul, and maintaining a strict life support design focus are the biggest priorities. That isn't a criticism of any other life support mods, but simply a recognition of the intent and purpose of TAC-LS. Of course, making everything work is going to come first.

I have programming experience in C/C++, but not with C#. As a disabled veteran with limited work, I also have some time on my hands. If anybody feels they are better situated and wants to take this on, please post and let me know. Otherwise, I'm pressing forward.


5 hours ago, Zyx Abacab said:

Yes, yes!  A thousand times, yes!  TAC absolutely needs a radially-attached container in addition to the stackable containers.  Like TheSaint pointed out, radially-attached containers could take on another form—perhaps more closely resembling the monoprop cylinders?—but I fail to see what benefit such a change would bring.

What would be really nice is if all the TAC parts could be placed into a "Life Support" category, a-la Kerbal Planetary Base Systems, so that all the thousand little variations of parts don't clutter up the "Utility" category.

I messaged the creator about this on April 22nd—almost two weeks ago—and he still hasn't read the message.  His last recorded login was on the 25th.

He did say he would be busy, though, for two weeks starting on the 20th.  Hopefully, we all will hear from him in a few days.

I'm a programmer with a fair bit of C# experience, but none with Unity or KSP in particular.  I'd be happy to work together with you to get this mod working in 1.1—and to bring some of the older elements, like the GUI, up-to-date.  However, I'm not in a stable enough environment to maintain something like this in the long term.

The source code for TAC seems pretty straightforward, but it has basically no documentation—and maybe a dozen or so meaningful source comments in the whole project.  It's also hard to find information about plugin development in recent versions of KSP, beyond very basic guides for outdated versions of IDEs.  With that in mind, I think the biggest hurdle to get over is finding detailed information.

Thank you for stepping up and offering to maintain this mod, by the way.


5 hours ago, danfarnsy said:

Yeah. The current patch provided by @WaylandSmith is great. I'm trying to look at the future of the mod, because a lot of external support is likely to disappear if other mod makers see there's nobody at the helm. It's already happening. I'd like to reverse that trend. As important as it is to know a mod works now, it's just as important to anticipate that the mod will continue to work later.

Here's my design intent: 1st priority is the stuff underneath the hood which has made TAC-LS awesome and which can stand a few updates for background processing. I'd like to do that as seamlessly as possible so it doesn't disrupt anybody's games. I start new career saves all the time, and having mods break them so I have to start over doesn't bother me much, but I know it's a big deal for a lot of players. 2nd priority is maintaining effective distribution and support, including CKAN. Unless Realism Overhaul has kicked TAC-LS to the curb, CKAN will be essential for the future of this mod. 3rd priority is streamlining parts and reducing clutter. This is already done in part with Modular Fuel Tanks, a few TAC-LS specific patches/mods, Tweakscale, Procedural Parts, etc. I want to keep support for these other mods up to date. I also would like to add a dependency in terms of a switching mod (B9 partswitch, Interstellar Fuel Switch, or Firespitter), so the organic part count for TAC-LS can be reduced. I do not intend to get rid of the Hexcans. I do intend to make it as easy as possible to get rid of them and as harmless as possible for your part count if you keep them.

Licensing will remain the same. Once I get something up and running, I will create a new release thread with hosting on Spacedock and Github. I'm still on the fence whether to update the name ("TAC-LS continued, expanded, community edition, reborn, etc."), but I'm leaning toward "no."

@Zyx Abacab, thank you for offering to help. I'll likely take you up on that, as well as hit up a few other mod authors for tips.

@danfarnsy If I could, I'd actually hug you right now!  I am so excited that this absolute-necessity mod for my KSP gameplay might not die!  Thank you thank you!

As for a name... We already had "Thunder Aerospace."  Why not "Lightning Tech?"  You can abbreviate it "Lit," as in "Lit Life Support," or something.

I dunno, I got nothin.  But this is awesome!  Perhaps solicit name suggestions in this thread, and if you're still undecided, host some sort of voting poll in a new thread to vote on some of the less-silly submissions?

Oh, I almost forgot to post this info on how to update mods for KSP v1.1.x.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, NathanKell said:

@danfarnsy what other stuff have you worked on, both KSP and not? Languages? @Zyx Abacab it'd be helpful if you'd mention too, since you offered to help as well. :)

EDIT: I'd also really like to get @WaylandSmith involved, since s/he already did the heavy lifting on porting. :)

I've contributed to RPM and other config updates for B9 aerospace. Programming-wise, I have breadth but not much depth: C/C++, Java a long time ago, plus the typical physics department tools: Mathematica, Matlab, etc. So I understand what most things are structurally, I just need to learn the formalisms, syntax, and oddities about C#, which I'm already jumping into.

I'd love to get @WaylandSmith involved too. He indicated he wasn't interested in maintaining the mod. I don't know what that translates into in terms of occasional contributions.

38 minutes ago, SmarterThanMe said:

Can I please suggest that @danfarnsy make a new thread so that he has editing rights over the first post, and that this thread be locked?


Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, NathanKell said:

@Zyx Abacab it'd be helpful if you'd mention too, since you offered to help as well. :)

I'm actually a web developer by trade, so I'm most proficient with PHP and JavaScript.

The only KSP-related thing I've made was a planetary science tracker—in pure JS.  (Admittedly, that was before I knew the game kind of tracks these things for you....)

That said, I've written several programs in C#/.NET, including a (mostly) feature-complete clone of RSIGuard, a personal budgeting application, and a desktop client for a web app.  I've also made a toolkit for creating and modifying EPUB files in Python.  I (used to) have a working knowledge of C++, but I haven't done anything with the language in years.

Right now, I'm learning Rails in the hopes that maybe, just maybe, I could get away from PHP.

Edited by Zyx Abacab
I accidentally a word.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, SmarterThanMe said:

Can I please suggest that @danfarnsy make a new thread so that he has editing rights over the first post, and that this thread be locked?

@NathanKell, @Zyx Abacab, @WaylandSmith New thread is here. It is a development thread until we have a release available, and then I will start that up and manage it as well. Let's please move discussion there. As for locking this thread, I'll let NathanKell or a moderator make the call on that one, since it's not mine.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, NathanKell said:

Awesome, thank you both! :)

I would suggest waiting a bit before locking in case @TaranisElsu has anything else he'd like to post--maybe until there's a new release from the continuation.

And of course, if a person could indicate at the very tippy-toppest margin of this original thread a link for the new one, that'd be swell also, once we get to that point.  (Having to go to the end of a thread with an extra click or three to find where the new discussion sits seems... well.) :)

So excited!!!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, TaranisElsu said:

So it looks like you all figured it out in my absence. The Realism Overhaul (RO) team will be the curators, and it looks like danfarnsy is taking point.

Good luck and have fun!

Glad to see you drop by! I'd tell you it's in good hands, but, well... it's in hands!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, NathanKell said:

With TaranisElsu giving his blessing, it might now be time to close the thread. So, uh, people don't get confused like the above. :)

( new thread here: )


You know, you might be right.


Link to comment
Share on other sites

This topic is now closed to further replies.

  • Create New...