HebaruSan Posted July 21 Share Posted July 21 (edited) 8 minutes ago, Lisias said: <...> You left out the most interesting part: install: - find: HotAirBalloon install_to: GameData This tells us that the mod's folder in the ZIP and in GameData is named "HotAirBalloon". This is what would be used in Module Manager clauses like :NEEDS[HotAirBalloon] if other mods needed to reference this mod. It's traditional for CKAN identifiers to match Module Manager identifiers when possible. Edited July 21 by HebaruSan Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JonnyOThan Posted July 21 Share Posted July 21 (edited) 3 hours ago, Lisias said: Yes, I have. No, you haven’t. It is easy to change a mod’s identifier before it is added to CKAN. Even now, it would not be prohibitive to change it back seeing as the mod’s existence on CKAN is only a few days old and there are no relationships to worry about and a small install base. 3 hours ago, Lisias said: So you are implying that the author's standpoint is meaningless and can be ignored? Of course not. But authors also don’t get the last word on everything. We try to act in the best interests of authors and ckan users - and that often means doing things for the good of long term maintenance of the CKAN ecosystem. I laid out my rationale for making that change. I haven’t heard a good reason why it shouldn’t have been done other than the author wasn’t asked ahead of time. Edited July 21 by JonnyOThan Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gargamel Posted July 21 Share Posted July 21 So it appears that the CKAN team made a minor back-end change to a mod for the good of the mod itself and the CKAN environment. This change was an arbirtrary change, that can easily be reveresed if requested/needed. I have that correct, yes? Ok then, it seems this issue should be taken to a PM chain so you guys can work out the details that the public really doesn't need, or want, to know about. Perhaps some sort of documentation from the team to help avoid this type of situation in the future might help too. And let's remember, it's usually best to start with a PM to ask a question before posting it publicly in the forums with the appearance of implication of malfeasance. That often won't lead to clear answers and just draws in rabble rousers to stir the pot. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ColdJ Posted July 22 Share Posted July 22 8 hours ago, JonnyOThan said: I’m still not really clear on what you think the impact of this change is. If I had asked, what would you say? And are you ok with this adjustment being applied to your other mods in the future? The reason I posted here originally was so that any member of the CKAN team could see and reply to my question. What prompted me to ask the question was a change from 1 commit, as can be seen in the screenshot. "Removed authors name from identifier in case of eventual adoption" Sure I am not a programmer, you understand technical aspects of the running of your repository that I do not, but the statement is clearly written. The issue is something that is a problem in the modern world as whole. The culture of "opt out if you happen to find out what was done without consultation" instead of "be given a choice to opt in". Whether I want a mod of mine to be adopted at a future date is my choice. I see plenty of old mods made in earlier versions of KSP and seemingly abandoned that I would love to get in and fix up to work in the latest version (Such as "Grounded", which I would like to fix the wheels on.) but I don't assume I can, just because I want to. Maybe giving authors the choice upon creation of a mod on Spacedock to opt in (even if it is just a statement they write in the info) is the way to go. Knowing what the author wants rather than assuming and changing things would actually save you work. So to answer your questions: "I’m still not really clear on what you think the impact of this change is. If I had asked, what would you say?" : No thank you. "And are you ok with this adjustment being applied to your other mods in the future?" : No. Please leave anything to do with author identification as it was generated by Spacedock. If you would like to discuss this further, please feel free to send me a personal message. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JonnyOThan Posted July 22 Share Posted July 22 Following up in PM. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lisias Posted July 22 Share Posted July 22 11 hours ago, Gargamel said: This change was an arbirtrary change, that can easily be reveresed if requested/needed. Yes, it was arbitrary, but no, it's not easily reversed as explained below: Quote 15 hours ago, JonnyOThan said: Here’s the thing: it is difficult (but not impossible) to change a mod’s identifier. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JonnyOThan Posted July 22 Share Posted July 22 (edited) 1 hour ago, Lisias said: it's not easily reversed as explained below: It’s easy to reverse right now. It’s not easy to reverse in a few years when there are more interconnected relationships and more users that may have installed the mod - which is when any hypothetical identifier change after an adoption would be taking place. Also, there was a bit of info referenced by HebaruSan: the ckan spec says that the identifier *should* match the installed folder name. There are a lot of benefits to this. I wasn’t aware of that when I made the change, but it happened to luckily also bring the metadata in alignment with this recommendation. However it is just a recommendation. Edited July 22 by JonnyOThan Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JonnyOThan Posted July 22 Share Posted July 22 (edited) 2 hours ago, Lisias said: Yes, it was arbitrary No, the change was not arbitrary. There are two good reasons why it should be done. They've been laid out in this thread. You really don't need to continue this discussion since we're talking with ColdJ in PMs. Edited July 22 by JonnyOThan Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
adsuri Posted July 27 Share Posted July 27 I have been having trouble adding a preexisting instance to CKAN via the "manage new instances" option. The file explorer window that CKAN pops up when I click "add new instance to CKAN" only shows the folders that all the files are in, but none of the actual files in the KSP folder I want to add. When I go back to file explorer on it's own, all the files (the build text file, the game executable, etc.) are still there but they won't show up in CKAN's window. The dropdown window in the bottom right of the CKAN file explorer window that usually lets you filter for file types only shows "game program file," without any other options, but I'm not sure if that has anything to do with it. For reference, this is what I'm seeing from CKAN's window. Only the folder show up, but none of the actual files. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HebaruSan Posted July 27 Share Posted July 27 @adsuriif Linux, see https://github.com/KSP-CKAN/CKAN/issues/4124 . Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
adsuri Posted July 28 Share Posted July 28 15 hours ago, HebaruSan said: @adsuriif Linux, see https://github.com/KSP-CKAN/CKAN/issues/4124 . Nope, I am on Windows 11. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JonnyOThan Posted July 28 Share Posted July 28 (edited) On 7/27/2024 at 10:20 AM, adsuri said: I have been having trouble adding a preexisting instance to CKAN via the "manage new instances" option. The file explorer window that CKAN pops up when I click "add new instance to CKAN" only shows the folders that all the files are in, but none of the actual files in the KSP folder I want to add. When I go back to file explorer on it's own, all the files (the build text file, the game executable, etc.) are still there but they won't show up in CKAN's window. The dropdown window in the bottom right of the CKAN file explorer window that usually lets you filter for file types only shows "game program file," without any other options, but I'm not sure if that has anything to do with it. For reference, this is what I'm seeing from CKAN's window. Only the folder show up, but none of the actual files. Don’t install KSP in onedrive . It also looks like you might have renamed the executable to ksp_x64_opm. Don’t do that either. Edited July 28 by JonnyOThan Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ColdJ Posted August 5 Share Posted August 5 Apologies to CKAN. I realised my very first release of ColdJ's Military Planes Soviet, was missing the craft folder and files. I have rectified quickly with version 1.0.1 but the automated service will have the original, which may cause problems for you. https://spacedock.info/mod/3684/ColdJ's Military Planes Soviet#changelog Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
theogameren Posted August 31 Share Posted August 31 is there a black theme for CKAN? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HebaruSan Posted August 31 Share Posted August 31 1 hour ago, theogameren said: is there a black theme for CKAN? Hi, CKAN uses the colors your OS gives it. You can change them on Windows thusly: https://github.com/KSP-CKAN/CKAN/wiki/Installing-CKAN-on-Windows#dark-theme Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.