Ippo

If you mean to add water to the blacklist, yes, this should prevent the problem: however you won't get any water leaks at all, in any part. No need to dock, you can just fly to the damaged probe. In fact, I suggest you launch your probes without spare parts, since they are quite heavy and expensive and you are going to need a manned mission anyway. In the final release probes won't have any spare parts in them.

In the VAB or SPH right click on any part and check that there is a panel called reliability info. You can also launch a ship and right click on any part (either from inside or during an EVA) and you should see some more failure related options. The issue is with Procedural Parts, not with Procedural Fairings: its tanks are not recognized.

Thanks for your kind words Feedback on the frequency of failures is extremely important to me, so please share it anytime! Since we are talking about redundancy, let me share one tip: multiple small tanks are better than one large tanks, because you can isolate the leaking tank by closing its valves. That way you can at least contain the losses until the repair team can get on site

Yes, but it's the other way around. It's US that needs to support TAC, not the viceversa. And in fact, if you had checked the Universal Storage thread, you'd already know it's coming in its next release.

Personally, they seem too forgiving imho: 2.7 tons for six kerbals is basically free (if you can design a roun trip for duna, 2.7 tons will likely be well within the normal safety margins, at least for me). The price seems better though. Little OT: as you will have been notified by github, issue #27 appears fixed by pre 4, at least for me

Well, while I agree that there is no real problem, I also think that a good mod manager with auto-updates would be sweet.

Hi everyone, I'm having a problem with scenario modules. I have one that contains some settings and other amenities, so that my PartModules can access them. However, I need to load these values during OnStart(), and it appears that when I try to do that the ScenarioModule hasn't been instantiated yet. And yes, I did remember to add the scenario to the game before I tried to use it. Does anybody know more about this?

Thanks! By the way, if I was as good at modding as I am bad at surfing, I'd be RoverDude.

Well, considering how well the transition to curse has been handled, I really think that anyone that wants to make a successful mod manager will just have to deal with the fact that curse will never be adopted by the majority of the community. My mod, for instance, is not hosted there. Right or wrong it doesn't matter: many modders refuse to host on curse, and this is a fact that is here to stay. Basically, modders won't start adopting a standard until it gains some traction, and it cannot gain traction if it only supports curse.

Yes, DangIt includes a .version file, which is extra-convenient for its 2 users However, KSP AVC seems to have a pretty serious bug that limits its utility at the moment. As for the mod manager, basically what users want is essentially the Nexus Mod Manager: great website to browse, super-easy installation, and update notifications. I don't honestly know why the Nexus is not used by this community: I don't know it very well myself, but I noticed that none of the three mods that are on nexus support the mod manager. If anyone knows why, I'd be really interested in knowing why. Also, your post has generated a lot of heat also because it is not the first time this is suggested and discussed: in fact, a quick search brings up 3 different mod managers (#1, #2 and #3). Please note that #1 and #2 have been abandoned though correction: #1 is still active (my bad, sorry), but in the IRC channel there have been some discussions about a fourth project which is still active, AFAIK. So yeah, basically the reaction was not extremely positive because this is an old issue that has been raised many times, and no one has ever been able to solve it completely.

Hi, I'm back. I am wondering: does anybody really plan to use this? Because technically, it has never been necessary. You can obviously just replicate the mechanism I am using*, which is very simple, and avoid a dependency on another mod, and we all know that dependencies are evil. The reason I made this is that I needed it, and then realized that if anyone else was going to need the same thing then it was pointless to reinvent the wheel. However, reinventing the wheel might be better for you if you want to avoid a dependency. So yeah: is anybody interested in this? Because 0.24 broke it, and I'm not going to need it myself for a while. If there is no interest, I'll just do other stuff first.

Sure, let's talk. So, if I understand your point (correct me if I'm wrong), basically the problem is primarily around two issues: - finding new mods - updating already installed mods If I understand correctly, you would like to have some sort of tool that can automatically install and update mods in a similar fashion to the Nexus Mod Manager. Is this right or am I misunderstanding something?

I had a quick glance at your charts (I am a bit tied up atm): I see someone has studied HAZOP Thanks for the input, I'll scavenge utilize your tables to design some more failures down the line. As for the tech tree, I'd like to do it MechJeb style: unlocking a placeholder part that enables more behaviours. It will probably come in two "lines" of upgrades: one line for reliability out of the box, and one for better inspections / repairability. It's all very theoretical atm, since 1) I need to to some heavy code changes before I can go on and 2) I honestly have no idea how to deal with the tech tree. (Also, back from vacation, development resumed)

If standardizing meant only having to follow a certain folder structure and including a metadata file, I'd be happy to do it. Of course, I'm just a very small modder here, and I don't know how feasible this would be for big mods. However, we already have a couple of good start-ups, especially AVC. It's a shame that the RSS bundler has been discontinued: luckily, its code is public domain, so maybe someone could pick it up and evolve it in the tool the OP is looking for.

In that case, my memories must be out of date. Still, I am heading for the beach.

Personally, I think it's because it can be distributed like this. Module Manager, for example, causes issues if you have multiple copies, while mod statistics doesn't: therefore there is no need to put it outside the main folder. That being said: I really don't see why I should defend a mod I don't even approve myself. While all you guys get a grip about this mess, I'll be at the beach. C ya.

Well, that's something you have to discuss with the ones who are redistributing it. I am not, and if I was, I would give it its own folder, so I can't answer about this.

It isn't - modstatistics could very well have its own directory in game data. In fact, it does: after the first run it will create its own folder and always run from there.

I'd rather be right.

This is where you are wrong. You SHOULD have to read all of it (except the source code). This is where you are not making sense. The license states what you can or cannot do. The forum post states what the mod does and what it contains and how you install it. The readme... The name says it all. You want mods? This is how you get them. If you don't want to deal with these issues, PLAY STOCK.

Whatever issues you have with the design of mod statistics is, luckily, not my problem. I don't know if the automatic copy on the main folder bypasses the settings or not, I haven't checked. If it does, then it is a serious issue and you should talk about it with Majiir (the best way is to open an issue on the github tracker, imho). Also, you have no idea how entitled you sound when you talk about reading a forum thread like a chore. These mods are made for free and shared as they are, no guarantees. You have NO rights whatsoever: a mod is dangerous content provided by unknown random guys on the internet and if you don't want to read a couple hundred lines to understand what it does to your PC, then you don't get to complain. This is not Apple's app store: you are not supposed to just go on a downloading spree and install everything you can click on. When you ignored ferram's post, failing to do the basic minimum of research to understand what code was going into your processor, you have effectively agreed by your own ignorance to run everything he has included. And please note that this is coming from someone who opposes mod statistics in its current form.

It is not "the contents of someone's server", it is an auto-update feature for a modding API. You are also asked if you want to consent to the automatic update.

This is my cue to leave before I answer this and get permabanned. Feel free to infer my opinion of your post.

I had a prototype of a failure module for antennae, but it wasn't working, so it's postponed. Actually, (way down the line) remote tech will be even more sadist: you need connection to the KSC also for repairs, except trivial ones I haven't thought about science yet. P.S: It's "lose control", not "loose"

He didn't try to slip it past you, he clearly wrote in the OP that it is included. You don't have to scan the folders manually, you just need to read ONE forum post (and you should in any case: what if the new update had some new, complicated install procedure?)