[1.x+] Community Resource Pack

[FreeThinker]

@Angel-125 If you think you should be the curator of CompressedAir, that will be fine with me as long as the resource definition conforms to STP  (standard temperature and pressure ) of 1 L at 1 bar at 0 Celsius. Otherwise if only want some minor adjustment I will implement the desired changes

Edited September 13, 2017 by FreeThinker

[RoverDude]

Also - if you folks are going to change CRP in a way that messes with either of your mods, we should decide on a release date so everyone can coordinate.  I can work with whatever you two want, as long as I have 24 hours notice.

[Angelo Kerman]

3 hours ago, FreeThinker said:

@Angel-125 If you think you should be the curator of CompressedAir, that will be fine with me as long as the resource definition conforms to STP  (standard temperature and pressure ) of 1 L at 1 bar at 0 Celsius. Otherwise if only want some minor adjustment I will implement the desired changes

 

3 hours ago, RoverDude said:

Also - if you folks are going to change CRP in a way that messes with either of your mods, we should decide on a release date so everyone can coordinate.  I can work with whatever you two want, as long as I have 24 hours notice.

Actually, I'm switching Heisenberg's parts over to a new resource, and taking steps to ensure that this problem doesn't happen again, now that resource name doesn't have to match display name. And no, the new resource's display name is not "CompressedAir."

Edited September 13, 2017 by Angel-125

[RoverDude]

Only comment on that... the entire point of CRP is that we had too many names for the same thing (lqdWater, water, etc.) or straight out conflicts.  While anyone is free to use it, and anyone is free to do whatever they want in their own mods, the spirit (and really, the expectation) of folks involved in curating resource is that we work together to eliminate duplicate definitions.  And this means a lot of discussion and compromise.  Nobody is obligated to participate in that, but in the long haul, it is a disservice to the community when we decide its easier to have alternate definitions than to find some common ground and compromise.  And as @regex pointed out, while this process can be messy at times, the end goal is a unified set of resources, and IMO having multiple definitions for compressed air is counter to that. 

[Angelo Kerman]

I specifically mentioned that I am creating a new resource, not a new resource with a display name called CompressedAir. You've made it clear that the resource is a 1-liter resource based on standard atmospheric pressure. That's fine, I acknowledge that, except that the definition that I've used since last December is essentially stock IntakeAir with a different name.

Changing my parts to use a resource that is now 3000x less dense doesn't work, so now I will retool my parts to use a new resource, CompressedGas in this case, that hopefully won't suddenly show up in CRP like CompressedAir did in August. Not an insurmountable problem but definitely inconvenient.

I agree that cooperation on resource definitions is good and avoids conflicts and errors- I do remember the days when there was no CRP. But I'm less inclined to participate when my proposals to add resources get shut out, supposedly for an apparent lack of widespread use, only to show up anyway without my knowledge or input. At least now, with the ability to use a resource name that doesn't match the display name I can protect myself against future issues, because at this point, I can't trust that resources that I create won't be independently created, or swiped, and become part of CRP.

[FreeThinker]

@Angel-125 Although CompressedGas does not have a Wikipedia page like CompressedAir (and therefore likely to conflict), any pronounceable name like CompressedGas there is still a reasonable chance it will conflict with other mods. If you insist on not registering your resource in CTT, but still want to prevent resource conflict,  instead of using CompressedGas,  perhaps use a random alpha numeric generator to create a random name like XNkKvYiHc and give it a display name "Compressed Air". This will lower the chance of conflict  to 1/144x 10^15

 

Edited September 14, 2017 by FreeThinker

[RoverDude]

Actually, that would just make things worse since you're going to end up with duplicate display names which is going to confuse the hell out of players.

 

[RoverDude]

1 hour ago, Angel-125 said:

I specifically mentioned that I am creating a new resource, not a new resource with a display name called CompressedAir. You've made it clear that the resource is a 1-liter resource based on standard atmospheric pressure. That's fine, I acknowledge that, except that the definition that I've used since last December is essentially stock IntakeAir with a different name.

Changing my parts to use a resource that is now 3000x less dense doesn't work, so now I will retool my parts to use a new resource, CompressedGas in this case, that hopefully won't suddenly show up in CRP like CompressedAir did in August. Not an insurmountable problem but definitely inconvenient.

I agree that cooperation on resource definitions is good and avoids conflicts and errors- I do remember the days when there was no CRP. But I'm less inclined to participate when my proposals to add resources get shut out, supposedly for an apparent lack of widespread use, only to show up anyway without my knowledge or input. At least now, with the ability to use a resource name that doesn't match the display name I can protect myself against future issues, because at this point, I can't trust that resources that I create won't be independently created, or swiped, and become part of CRP.

That sounds more like CRP IntakeAtm then, assuming similar specs.  But likely moot points given the rest of that message.  I'd suggest taking a step back from the keyboard for a bit, because all of the passive aggressive hostility in that message above is not helping.

[Angelo Kerman]

Let's try to avoid personal attacks about attitude, they're off topic. As I've mentioned, I have a solution for the conflicting definitions for CompressedAir. And in the interests of cooperation and to try to prevent a problem before it occurs, I created a PR for Konkrete, another resource that I made that has the potential for resource definition conflicts between mods, and is already being used by one other mod.

[RoverDude]

The solution proposed goes against the spirit of CRP and by mixing up display/resource names (other than for readability, which is an edge case) is going to end up causing more trouble than it is worth.

And sorry, but attitude towards the project and project team is very on topic.  A large part of why this project works is that we're all willing to come to the table and figure out how to make an optimum resource set that works for everyone.  This sometimes means changing our mods and consolidating resources to keep everything in line, establishing and adhering to standards, and a host of other things that absolutely require a respectful working attitude with other members of the team.  To not have these is too much of a risk given how many people depend on this mod and depend on the curators being able to work together.

 

[Nertea]

I think that the obvious solution at this point is to have traceable injection points for new resources. This has happened a few times now and we need a chain of custody for changes. It looks like the way that this happened was because it is too easy to merge dev into master, so to speak.

Firstly, it needs to be on all users of the CRP to submit new resources using the public forum, and civilly discuss planned changes and adjustments with all stakeholders. Stakeholders in my mind are everyone who curates any CRP resource and therefore has a stake in using the mod. To my mind this is myself, RD, angel, freethinker. Probably a few more but my kid screamed for 15 hours last night so I'm not all there.

We can use different methods to do this, I might suggest making use of GitHub merge request reviews to do this. New resources can be proposed in a PR for that resource, all curating stakeholders can be pinged for input, and other users can be pulled in if stakeholders see another user.

Secondly, I've mentioned this before, but there should really be no reason to add a resource to the CRP that is only used by one mod. The reasoning for this seems clear to me, it creates these issues by locking in a resource without a consultation process. Without more than one user it's not a community resource....

These changes will add more overhead to adding resources to the CRP. That's fine. The project is now a large community framework and it needs more stringent controls.

 

[Vanamonde]

Some posts have been removed from this thread. Please don't make the arguments personal, and accusing people of doing unpleasant things is not going to win anybody over to your way of thinking. 

[RoverDude]

@Nertea - makes sense.  the rate of new resources is (fortunately) pretty low.  For starters, I'd say discussion in the thread followed by the PR.  We've done this in the past for things like Lithium, etc. - no reason to not extend it to all resources.  Also restricting things to stuff that is cross-mod should limit a lot of it as well.  Though a more correct definition would be cross-author (i.e. we should see multiple modders actually using the resource in their mods).  It will also, to your point, mitigate people 'staking a claim' on a resource name.   

For the current stuff, I'll let @Angel-125 put forth the Konkrete proposal and it's proposed config for discussion.  Fusion Pellets I'll move curation on.  

My thoughts RE CompressedAir - since this was a recent addition, it should be dropped unless someone can show me another mod that uses it with its current specifications other than KSPIE (would like to get other thoughts as we generally don't drop CRP resources).

[FreeThinker]

10 hours ago, RoverDude said:

My thoughts RE CompressedAir - since this was a recent addition, it should be dropped unless someone can show me another mod that uses it with its current specifications other than KSPIE (would like to get other thoughts as we generally don't drop CRP resources).

 

I strongly disagree with this line of reasoning because CRP is more than just an agreement between participating mod authors. CRP also prevents conflict between participating and nonparticipating actors. By that I mean to say that CRP act as the de facto authority on resources which other mod developers can use as a library to look if a particular resource is in use by any other major mod.

Just take for instance the resource defined by the Real Fuels mods by @NathanKell. Many of its defined resources initially were only used by the Real Fuels mod itself, but several other mods, including myself, have adopted several of it defined resources over time, and that was possible precisely because they were defined without any other known other mods which used than at the time of declaration.

Edited September 15, 2017 by FreeThinker

[ThreePounds]

I added a German translation. Pull request is up on GitHub

[FreeThinker]

8 minutes ago, Three_Pounds said:

I added a German translation. Pull request is up on GitHub

You should have committed to Dev, not master. Don't worry, we all make these mistakes

[ThreePounds]

25 minutes ago, FreeThinker said:

You should have committed to Dev, not master. Don't worry, we all make these mistakes

Feel free to sort it out for me. I am not familiar with the structure of your code and I don't really need to be.

EDIT: crud. I am missing keys. I should really pay more attention.

Edited September 15, 2017 by Three_Pounds

[goldenpsp]

2 hours ago, Three_Pounds said:

Feel free to sort it out for me. I am not familiar with the structure of your code and I don't really need to be.

EDIT: crud. I am missing keys. I should really pay more attention.

you don't need to understand the code structure. Just submit your PR against the dev branch.

[FreeThinker]

45 minutes ago, goldenpsp said:

you don't need to understand the code structure. Just submit your PR against the dev branch.

he already did several hours ago

Edited September 15, 2017 by FreeThinker

[goldenpsp]

1 hour ago, FreeThinker said:

he already did several hours ago

well that's good. Sadly my mind reading powers are offline and his post hadn't indicated he redid the PR.  My bad.

Edited September 15, 2017 by goldenpsp

[ThreePounds]

1 hour ago, goldenpsp said:

well that's good. Sadly my mind reading powers are offline and his post hadn't indicated he redid the PR.  My bad.

Yes, sorry for the confusing. I am still not fully accustomed to GitHub. I wasn't even aware they are different branches.

 

[goldenpsp]

30 minutes ago, Three_Pounds said:

Yes, sorry for the confusing. I am still not fully accustomed to GitHub. I wasn't even aware they are different branches.

 

yep. Pretty common. The first ever PR I ever did was to the wrong branch as well. 

[DStaal]

You know @RoverDude, you *can* set the default branch PRs get attached to on GitHub...

[RoverDude]

heh, fair enough   Also thanks @Three_Pounds for the PR!

[SamBelanger]

I think it is missing something 

Spoiler

Mods that are CRP Compliant

(Mods that are known to play well in the sandbox together)

• OptionalAtmospheres
• Universal Storage
• TAC Life Support