blizzy78

Not sure if I would see this as a goal really, but of course we could try and see how it works out. I just don't think it should have a high priority.

I think the approach here should be to determine how much time is spent where. From my own personal play style, I'm often spending much more time in orbit than on the ground. But of course, that may be totally different for others. In any case, I'm not so sure about "landing/in atmosphere." Usually landings are pretty short, a few minutes max. The longest time between "on ground" and "in orbit" would be spent in airplanes, I guess, where it's rather difficult to enjoy music because of the engine noise. So my suggestion would be to concentrate on "orbit" and "ground" first. As for the order, I don't prefer one over the other. Perhaps Kerbin, Mun and Minmus should be done first, because those are what most players will go to first, but then it would be up to you. Maybe do it in the order of distance from Kerbin. I'd rather go for static pieces first, before spending much time on dynamic tracks, if at all. Of course those would be cool to have, but from what I've read about other games that have those, they are pretty difficult to get right - not necessarily because of the programming, but it needs to fit the action well - and ideally, it would be possible to seamlessly blend from one mood of the track to another. So I really think that's way more work than static pieces, and is just too time consuming. --- Just to note, and I also wrote that in response to a PM from UpsilonAerospace - this is what I would love to see (hear) when all is said and done: - 15 celestial bodies you can land on, at least 2 tracks each for "ground", with some kind of "regular" mood - 17 celestial bodies you can orbit, at least 2 tracks each for "orbit", with some kind of "quiet/lonely" mood - all tracks for each celestial body would share a common theme - 2-3 tracks for special locations/edge cases (interplanetary Sun orbit; Armstrong memorial; ...) -> 66+ tracks total This list is my dream of it all I know this would be a LOT of work. I'm no composer or anything like that, but I do enjoy good game music Of course we could (and should) start with way less, say 10 tracks total, and play those in a random fashion, regardless of current location. We can always add more.

What I would love to see is every celestial body having its own theme of sorts, with different pieces for in-orbit and landed. Not required though, that's just my personal dream

Aww, you're mean. Sssh. You're not supposed to. Yes, that would be a bug. I've reuploaded the Toolbar Plugin with a few bugfixes, so it should work as intended now. Just redownload and replace the Toolbar.dll.

It seems like ApplicationLauncher.Ready always returns false during an onGameSceneLoadRequested callback. This makes it impossible to remove buttons via RemoveModApplication() if it only does so when Ready==true. private void Awake() { GameEvents.onGameSceneLoadRequested.Add(onGameSceneLoadRequested); } private void onGameSceneLoadRequested(GameScenes scene) { Debug.Log(string.Format("app launcher ready: {0}", ApplicationLauncher.Ready)); // always prints "False" }

You don't use the RenderingManager to draw a simple window. In OnGUI(), you should use GUILayout.Window() to do that. To register for showing/hiding the UI (F2 key), you should use GameEvents.onHideUI/onShowUI.

I know this is not answering your question, but might I ask what it is that you're trying to do?

That's because it hasn't been implemented yet: https://github.com/blizzy78/ksp_irc/issues/5

Precise Node 1.1.0 is now available for download. Note: If the download page is linking an older version for you, press F5 in your browser.

http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/threads/88286-SPOILER-%28possibly%29-New-main-menu-screen?p=1313669&viewfull=1#post1313669

First, you don't know if he's forcing it on his users if you don't ask. I for one certainly don't. Second, I don't see anything bad in his approach. It's his mod, he can bundle whatever he likes (forum rules and licenses permitting, of course.) There is no need to ask anyone about anything. Laie and me were talking about technogeeky's bundling of ModStats into SCANsat - but yeah, I think that's why Majiir made ModStats the way he did.

No, and to my knowledge there aren't any. I wasn't talking about auto updating mods, but about mods that are hosted in the regular fashion here on the forums. Your post seemed to imply that the vulnerabilities you mentioned did not apply to those.

How is that specific to Majiir's auto updater and not to all the other mod downloads posted on these forums?

(Forgot that in my previous post replying to yours.) I don't think it is any of Squad's business to make rules on that.

I believe that is part of ModStats' auto updater? You should ask Majiir that question, really.

True that

You are wrong: It says that very clearly near the top of the post. Also, it says so in the change log, which you should read every time you get a new version. Edit: Okay, technically, just in case you might insist on your exact wording - yes, he does not suggest, recommend, nor ask for installation of ModStats. I was going more after the point where it had been suggested that he did not mention ModStats at all, which is not true. That said, it's his right to just bundle it without asking.

As I understood his post, it is trust what makes him expect things that mods do (or don't.)

Yes, they have, in the process accusing me of producing malware and/or spyware.

You do realize that 64-bit is inherently unstable? Also, I think Mihara should really test on 32-bit rather than 64-bit only for that reason, but that's his decision, of course.

Well, yeah. I don't think this thread is about discussing whether or not "just ask users" on the forums is going to get you reliable statistics - so I won't go into that here.

Statistics are not simple download counts. You want to see relations between mods, or even crashes. In any case, that should be discussed in the ModStatistics thread - if it weren't locked, obviously.

It says right in the SCANsat OP: If you can't be bothered to read that, it's your problem. Opt-in/out or not.

Most... point... at... maneuver node... exactly.

There we go