Poodmund

A good implementation of PQS_MapArtist and PQS_VertexCanyons would be interesting to see.

It would be super if you made this mod a sort of showcase for your custom PQS mods... or is that the plan?

I'm glad you find it useful. Only really for the inner planets, with the DSN 3 1xRA-15 antenna will get you coverage from Duna inwards towards the Sun at all times.

Could you please post this as an issue on our Git repository (https://github.com/Galileo88/Galileos-Planet-Pack/issues) with a clean install of just GPP and its essential dependencies, Contract Configurator and the Tourism Contracts? If you could do a small write of of this with reproduction steps and include all the usual log files of your bug test that would be helpful going forward with this issue between the Kerbal Renamer and Contract Configurator.

Absolutely not an issue. EVE 7-4 should not be used, its archaic and if its holding back potential development of this plugin then that is pretty sad to be honest.

It just prevents random strings from combining to create names that may be offensive.

As you're making a concerted effort and willingness to resolve this issue, I'll ping @blackrack here just to ensure that you get his attention. Also the latest dev build can be found here: https://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/index.php?/topic/103963-wip12213-scatterer-atmospheric-scattering-v00320-0320b-06072017-water-refraction/&page=270&tab=comments#comment-3210887

CKAN has no issues with any mods using the same folders or folder structure as long as they don't try to replace/change files with the same filenames. Therefore, using the TextureReplacer folder a way to make mods cross compatible between TR and TRR should be fine as long as all included files are uniquely named (depending on what texture mods are used... in this case, Skybox mods should be unique as only 1 can be installed). I'd suggest you understand how CKAN manages its file handling before misinforming others as to how to structure their add-ons.

@Cetera if you want to make your texture mod compatible with TR and TRR, check out my Skybox listings on Spacedock. They are set up to work with TR but have the necessary MM config to allow TRR to recognise them and get them to function. It's pretty simple.

I very much like the look of Gersemi. I hope you continue to keep knuckling down and working on this, it shows some good promise.

This is all looking really nifty now. Congrats on the recent major implementations.

*Insert quip about the Monkey SQUAD business name and logo here*

This is a pretty nifty trick you have here, TWG. Congrats.

As someone who is offering a "Texture" mod at the moment, I am currently packaging it in a way that supports the directory structure requirements of 'TextureReplacer' whilst also including a config file in that directory that patches in compatibility for 'TextureReplacerReplaced'. Hopefully that way it covers most ground for the end users.

The MM issue, maybe, was the fact that Scatterer's default behavior was set to resave the config files on scene change. Due to some configs using the @ (Edit) node modifier to change existing configs the 're-saving' of the configs perhaps adding in the new, edited config node patch below the existing patch which was causing the configs to double up and all get added to each other within the same nodes. Basically got really messy. I think this was resolved if the option was turned off. Thats all off the top of my head. It would require verifying that it is the case. @Galileo, did the issue with coloured (not 255,255,255) EVE cloud layers getting recoloured back to 255,255,255 when 'integrateWithEVEClouds' was enabled get fixed?

That method won't really work with what I require though as then TextureReplacer and TextureReplacerReplaced would have to have a dependency on, say, "Skybox-provides" of which then all the skyboxes on CKAN would have to update their metadata with a "provides: [ "Skybox-provides" ] " which is unreasonable as not everyone who installs Texture Replacer or TextureReplacerReplaced necessarily wants to have a custom skybox... also the two said dependent mods are not my mods, I have no involvement with them, and as such I shouldn't be making requests on them to be dependent on my mod(s) to achieve this behavior. Does that sound reasonable/make sense? EDIT: Ah, it seems TextureReplacerReplaced currently "provides": ["TextureReplacer"], so it is listed as a possible dependency satisfier when one of my skyboxes is selected for download in CKAN. I now get what you meant @HebaruSan with your above post. I can specify my mods to require TextureReplacer but TextureReplacerReplaced can be listed as a provider of that identifier also. All is good.

Does CKAN have the capability to list dependencies as an OR case? For example, you require either Mod A or Mod B but not both. I am trying to add support for TextureReplacer and also TextureReplaceReplaced at the same time but let the end user decide as to which they wish to use but I would require an OR behavior in the metadata dependencies node.

Currently in a predicament where I do not have access to my PC due to flooding but as soon as I do, I'll be sure to check it out. ... and no, that wasn't a cue for a Scatterer KSC glitch joke.

The issue here with "Star Mods", I feel, is that by a SQUAD representative posting a mod in the "Star Mods" section on the Official Kerbal Space Program Forums they are pretty much endorsing said mod as being a good, solid representation of what their game is/can be/can do . What has obviously got people upset is that they feel the are mods out there that have been released that haven't been given endorsement by SQUAD that they feel does represent what KSP is or can potentially be whilst a particular selection are being listed in the "Star Mods" section that are either not currently 'fleshed out', are of a much lower standard compared to others or could subjectively be argued against being a good representation of a mod for Kerbal Space Program. All this being said, I think a simple solution would be to get those who chose the mods that get featured to actively be involved in the playing community of the game to grasp an understanding and better knowledge of the modded KSP community. EDIT: To add to the above point, generally a lot of modders don't even play the game anymore as they spend most of their time with KSP either coding plugins, doing artwork etc. I don't see why being a SQUAD member of staff, having to work with the game in a job environment, would be much different. Maybe its time to outsource these decisions to community based members/community based group?

The solution is discussed here: However, I am not sure that it can be resolved unless the light parts are re-exported through Unity.

SO... for patches that need multiple passes, how should we get around this issue?

PQS mesh colliders only allow for convex surfaces so Caves or Tunnels are not possible.

On the contrary, tidal locking of a satellite to its primary body is exceedingly common: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tidal_locking

Just spitballing here Linux, but would it be at all conceivable that a Rectangular Array function could be possible in the Editor scenes when adding parts? The Rotational Symmetry tool is just a polar array around the part's origin at the set radius of the collider mesh's distance... could you specify a rectangular array to do something similar (even if its just limited to one row) so that you could place down like multiple parts down in a line with equal distances between them? This would be useful for situations like placing down lines of Solar Panels, equidistant lights down a vessel etc. Let it be known I have no idea how this could be implemented as its not something like changing an existing behaviour but introducing a brand new one.

You'll want to take a look at: https://github.com/Kopernicus/pqsmods-standalone/blob/master/PQSMod_FlattenArea.cs for the actual PQS Mod itself and also: https://github.com/Kopernicus/kittopia-dumps/blob/565b54b577e8b6d81919971c123a20231928c67a/Configs/Bop.cfg#L214 & https://github.com/Kopernicus/kittopia-dumps/blob/565b54b577e8b6d81919971c123a20231928c67a/Configs/Kerbin.cfg#L1615 ... for examples of them in use on Bop and Kerbin. EDIT: There is also FlattenAreaTangential if you want the surface to retain its curved, spherical shape relative to the radius of the body.