RoverDude

I should be able to hunt down your github IDs

Ok, I will sort a repo today, and add @JPLRepo, @Nils277, and @IgorZ for starters. We can start with Containers and Life Support for the first two categories, and add on as we get quorum.

We're working on a solution for this (and one to stop these kinds of conflicts in general going forward)

Thanks everyone for joining the discussion And yep, the general idea is to avoid collisions for custom categories (the high level icons on the left). @Angel-125 - if we have a bunch of them, they will scroll. It will not preclude us from having our own, but there would be a common DLL (I'd start a repo for this, GPL of course) that would handle the code bit, which is likely some variant on the one we all do individually anyway. Life Support is probably the best examnple. USI-LS has stuff like that, as does TAC-LS, KPBS, etc. @Nils277 - I agree with not breaking saves (and names would do this). I like your idea of a part module, because it will allow us to put things in multiple categories, etc. The individual modder could still control whether it was also in a stock category vs. use the word 'none' (i.e. @IgorZ's concern RE EVA items). And it's trivial (USI does this already) to have the category suppress if nothing uses it, nor would it interfere with other mods that add their own categories. Any participant would have collaborator access to the GitHub repo. This will allow all of us to improve on the framework as necessary based on our expertise (and alleviate any concerns about someone getting hit by a bus). Thanks all for participating Category wise, I'd go with guidelines and rules similar to what we have for CRP. We include it once two or more modders agree to collaborate on that (i.e. between me and @Nils277 we agree we need a Life Support category. I expect @JPLRepo would be on board with this as well). So we can jointly curate that one. We'd all deprecate our own categories in favor of the shared one, and agree to include and collaborate on the shared component. This would also be the gate for collaborator access to the GitHub repo. I'd handle releases (similar to CRP, FireSpitter) unless I got slammed by a bus, in which case anyone can pick up that torch. Figure that makes sense as I am one of the folks on the dev team (which means source access and being able to react to API changes better). Thoughts? Tentative goal would be to knock something together for launch as soon as this Sunday, at least to stop the conflict me and @Nils277 are having, but would love to have more options on board

Figure I would get this particular topic rolling With lots of modders using custom categories, we're starting to bump into each other. Is there interest in establishing, similar to CTT and CRP, a Community Category Kit (CCK)? If so... What categories are you currently using? How are you placing your parts in those categories? (Paging @Angel-125 and @Nils277 since those are two off the top of my head where we may have conflicts). Discuss [Heads up - will move this to a proper release thread, but here's the current Github link for interested parties :)] https://github.com/BobPalmer/CommunityCategoryKit/releases

(a) but I am not the one looking to add new configs, and they are none of my concern. While I am happy to help when I can, please respect that I have very limited time. (b) it is the abbreviation used on the KerbNet icon.

This requires Karbonite, which has the rest of the bits you need.

huh need to check this out.

Thanks will look

It's actually worked into the code, so a MM patch will not sort that

That is very likely a typo - I will go take a peek Thanks!

The concept test was not flight capable, was purely a POC.

Yep - horrible ground ISP by design. While a real Orion would launch from a planetary surface, I did that for balance reasons.

I disapprove. Let the pinging continue for @HoloYolo

@Merkov not sure if it will work for your purposes since one assumption is that the bits having their mass transferred have no child parts. i.e. it is fine for radial cargo containers in FTT, or the expandable Ranger modules in MKS.

..and you do realize I am (a) incredibly busy, and (b) it gives you incentive to actually test out your patch vs. sending me a bum file.

I'm 80% sure it is, but better to just test it yourself (i.e. I assume you would test any bands, etc. before putting them in as a pull request).

Clear out and try the current constellation zip (2016.10.11.03) if you are using that one.

@Sirad - Except that what you describe was not and is not my experience. So while you are free to 'suggest' all you want, I'll happily counter that with facts. Fact. We negotiated our own compensation. Fact. We negotiated the hours we were willing to commit to the work. Fact. On numerous occasions, we were told to rest, to not work weekends, to take it easy, and in that same conversation, told that certain timeframes were adjustable. Fact. There were regular enquiries made to make sure I was happy, not burnt out, asked if there was anything the business could provide that I needed, etc. - in other words, a pretty genuine concern for the welfare of the team. And pretty par for the course on what I'd expect management to do (I do the same with my own engineering team). Fact. I work precisely the hours I have contracted for. No more, no less. It's how I maintain work life balance. Fact. These represent a single data point (mine). But that data point is from someone who has worked with (and continues to work with) Squad since after the 0.90 launch. Also - note Nestor's relevant facts (quoted) "Fact: Chris (porkjet) left a few weeks ago in a totally unrelated event. He told me he had a new working opportunity. Not sure why he is listed with the rest of the group. Fact: Sebastian (sarbian) was invited as a temporal [sic] dev to help fixing bugs until 1.2 was released"

Start with KSP version and USI-LS version. New save or old save?

Yeah I need to run through and up the pressure limits

Not and still have them foldable, or without redoing the model

ummm.... because that's the format KSP uses, and avoids mip map issues. And you can still use the DDS as a base for the retexture - I do it all the time.

hmm... I'll take a peek. And those white ones do not have changing labels.

If there's an issue with the CTT config, odds are something changed on it - I'll do a CTT pass once I grab a KSP 1.2 official CTT.