(v0.17) Tested and verified working electrical solar panels, batteries & ion engines

[dishycourier]

To be honest with you, the community won't receive it well if they "go up elsewhere." You'll probably get banned. A few people might download it, but at the end of the day it's just another knock-off parts pack.

It's on you in the end, but keep in mind that a cooler head will prevail. CBBP is pretty cool about input with Kosmos, if that's something you're after. You could always suggest changes to the mod authors. That way, you get your balance input in and they get to keep their work. It's a compromise.

Edited September 26, 2012 by dishycourier
GRAMMMAAAARRRRR

[dikkjo]

Also too many ppl who are doing simple config edits, feels compelled to replace the "Authors" line with their own name, when all they did was changing the module line and adapting a few vars.

This kind of attitude is highly community unfriendly and is totally against any nature of open-source kindness, which also means is not legal.

[phoenix_ca]

To be honest with you, the community won't receive it well if they "go up elsewhere." You'll probably get banned. A few people might download it, but at the end of the day it's just another knock-off parts pack.

It's on you in the end, but keep in mind that a cooler head will prevail. CBBP is pretty cool about input with Kosmos, if that's something you're after. You could always suggest changes to the mod authors. That way, you get your balance input in and they get to keep their work. It's a compromise.

I rather resent your implication that I'm hot-headed. Forceful, maybe, but hardly hot-headed. Moving on to the body of your post:

How would it even be a parts pack? Without inclusion of any of the models or other assets, it wouldn't work without the original. And mod authors would be free to reincorporate balance adjustments made back into their mods if they so chose. It's well within the spirit of cooperation to improve existing work for mutual benefit.

Also too many ppl who are doing simple config edits, feels compelled to replace the "Authors" line with their own name, when all they did was changing the module line and adapting a few vars.

This kind of attitude is highly community unfriendly and is totally against any nature of open-source kindness, which also means is not legal.

I'm confused, because I thought I was talking about open-source kindness the entire time. At no time did I suggest such a cfg edit pack should claim credit for all the work done by the original authors (in fact I suggested quite the opposite). And indeed, the OP here didn't do anything of the sort either (though I don't know if they included anything beyond the cfg files because I didn't get a chance to download them).

I would also humbly submit that what I'm proposing to do, and continue to do, until such a project is invalid and obsolete, goes beyond merely "changing the module line and adapting a few vars". Sure, it's not all that complex now, but with more parts, more options and capabilities provided by plugins, such a task can become quite complicated.

[Dani-Sang]

Hoping on here to clear the confusion that is not needed.

First of all.

Ask permission, not only is that kind to do, it keeps the developer on the other side active and know what to do and what the community is requesting. (I already knew I had to switch)

Second.

My Electrical Energy parts are currently in overhaul and already switching towards Kreuzung's Energy Plugin. It is just that my job is more important than modding (and that has obvious a priority). I've asked somebody else to do the .cfg file editing, testing & balancing (just putting a few numbers doesn't cut it)

Third.

I don't mind people doing CFG edits for themselves to make it compatible with the mods they downloaded. However I don't like it when it is released towards the public. The reason for that is, if somebody edits and CFG file and releases it, then people always go to the modder if something gets broken. It will be even harder to keep track of everything and have effective bugtracking because you never know what the person did. So if you want to edit cfg files, do it for yourself and your own "risk"

Fourth.

If you would like to see something changed then go on the forum thread of the modder and ask him friendly to change parts to support the game in overal better. It just takes time to change it or adjust it. Having updates everyday is something I do not choose for. I prefere a big amount of fixes in one update so people don't get confused what version they need to have. But thats every modder for himself to decide.

[amore555]

Hey guys, just my 2 cents as a non modder. The site here is not all that unusual. Another game I play, " Mount and Blade" has a very active modding community, that has a great history in allowing reworked mods so long as they credit the author. They also have a sub section called "Open Source Mods" specifically for this reason.

Each major mod get's it's own subforum, in which submods can be added freely, and are encouraged.

In particualr there is a fantastic mod there called "The Floris Mod Pack" which is essentially a compilation of all the best mods, rebalanced to work together.

If you get a chance head over to their forum on taleworlds to take a look.

[dikkjo]

I'm confused, because I thought I was talking about open-source kindness the entire time.

Oh, i wasn't talking specifically to you, it's just a practice that seems to be very common...and it makes me bump on my chair every time i see it.

[Kreuzung]

Funny to see all the people who have never been to the IRC complaining about KSP modders not working together...

There are some incompatibilites, yes, and I honestly can't hear it anymore.

Please read this if you want to know more.

[Frostiken]

I just find it incredibly hard to honestly consider a .cfg some sort of intellectual property of the modder. The .cfg was originally written and organized by Squad. Adjusting a few numbers - which is all that's in 99.9% of .cfgs - doesn't suddenly make it yours. Replacing the author name with your own is a dick move, but it's hardly the end of the world if it does happen and I think the community can police itself rather than having a vague list of loose rules that result in post nukes, threats, drama, and bans.

Like I said, Fallout 3- you have gun packs and you have gameplay packs. A gun pack for FOOK isn't going to be balanced for FWE, and vice-versa. Some people like a harder experience, some easier. The Fallout Nexus forums are jam-packed with mods that are mods of mods. The only difference is in the format mods use there. In the Gamebryo games, mods are packages that overwrite each other in the order they're placed, so a gun patch simply is a second file that goes after the original. This isn't an option in KSP, obviously.

Despite what Kreuzung says there's still incompatibilities in mods - specifically balance-wise with simple parts. A good example is the RocktCo pack. Great looking parts, but DeusOverkill is an ephemeral one who only occasionally shows up here. His rockets are woefully underpowered and incapable of doing much. The easiest solution, of course, is that someone edits the .cfg to balanced values and releases it as an interim 0.17 patch. The community's obvious reaction is a meltdown and bans.

.cfgs are not any sort of intellectual property. It belongs to Squad more than it belongs to whoever edited it to work with their models and art, and you simply cannot change the copyright on something you don't own. Squad allows .cfg files to be freely edited and distributed, ipso facto, all modded .cfgs are subject to the same rules. The license doesn't change just because you slapped your stupid name in there.

Edited September 26, 2012 by Frostiken

[BlueSubstance]

Pipipictures please?

[rocketmanHK]

They still deserve the recognition of credit for their previous work. Can't stand on the shoulders of giants and then say you did it all yourself.

[Kreuzung]

>Frostiken

It is entirely possible to balance parts right, but it takes a lot of time. I did spend days on calculating volumes and making an OpenOfficeCalc table to find the right values for the new MMI parts.

It's like 10 caracters in a part.cfg file but without that it whould've been more or less a cheat mod.

[dishycourier]

It's not about those 10 characters. Although Squad came up with the basics for a cfg, the concept is in that cfg. For instance, say you revise your config file, oh 70some times (true story), and then find a novel way to combine multiple plugins and perfectly balance a part, then some dude comes along and undoes your work without crediting you or even changing the partname. Your work, your ideas, even your witty description is owned by the creator of the mod. I find it humorous that everyone's still going back and forth on something that's already been decided.

[Ted]

Moderator Comment: Well, I think this thread has indeed run its course. We've had experienced Add-On creators state their point and refer to discussions that have already taken place about this very topic. It is up to each individual Add-On creator to licence their work however they wish to, and that will be respected by the community, no matter what. Additionally, it really isn't that difficult to just PM the Add-On creator or come to the IRC channel and ask them there if you can distribute some modifications of their Add-Ons.

CFG edits are part of the Add-On and therefore are under the same licence.

Remember, Copyright law doesn't just apply when money is involved and 'Open-Source' doesn't mean Public Domain or anything along those lines. Also, it never hurts to be a nice guy and ask for permission.

Thread Closed.

Edited September 26, 2012 by Ted