Oolite Bulletins

arquebus wrote: ↑Wed May 01, 2024 7:50 pm

phkb wrote: ↑Thu Apr 25, 2024 7:05 am

Well, I would argue it only *half* works with Oolite, as long as you only use OoliteStarter.

I think it's important that OoliteStarter not break anything in Oolite in how it operates. And here's the thing: there is no reason to actually put *anything* into the ManagedAddOns folder. If users have downloaded mods using the internal DM, then, sure, move them into the "Deactivated" folder if they choose to do so via OoliteStarter. But you can put *every single OXZ into the "AddOns" folder*, with versioning etc, and then Oolite will work fine. It won't try and do anything with OXZ's in that folder (or subfolders thereof). It won't automatically update them, but at this point the user is probably using OoliteStarter and it can handle the updates, so that's fine. If they choose to stop using OoliteStarter, Oolite will tell them an update is available, but it can't be performed because it's installed in AddOns. They could then either delete it and reinstall it (so it goes into ManagedAddOns), or manually update it themselves. Either way, nothing is broken, and it's a relatively straightforward process to explain to someone why their mods aren't auto-updating.

If you really need to have version numbers in the filename, then just don't use ManagedAddOns.

I raised this issue earlier. It's still having knock-on effects for me. Now, if I start the game from OoliteStarter and bypass the main menu etc., everything seems to work just fine. But if I start Oolite independently, I get massive red alert spam about duplicate OXPs, so much so that the menus are obliterated and I can't even see how to quit without Alt-F4'ing my way out.

Starter should absolutely not be tinkering with names etc. in such a way that launching Oolite independently completely breaks things. I cannot stress this enough. If filename changes are necessary for smooth operation of Starter's versioning feature, part of that feature should include renaming the OXP back to normal whenever it gets put into one of the active AddOn folders. It's already possible to get the version information from inside the manifest, there's no reason to be renaming things in the "live" directory. Leave that for storing copies outside of Oolite's field of vision.

Nite Owl wrote: ↑Thu May 02, 2024 9:02 pm

Not sure how relevant this might be but have a look at a few OLD POSTS of mine on the subject of renaming OXZs.

Redspear wrote: ↑Sun Apr 21, 2024 11:24 am

Would this be relevant?

• Time Saver or Ain't Got All God Damn Day Flavour
  •  Indestructible Injectors
  •  Masslock Reimagined
  •  Power To Engines
  •  Traffic Redistributer

hiran wrote: ↑Sun May 12, 2024 10:41 pm

flavours

hiran wrote: ↑Tue May 21, 2024 1:29 pm

Hmmm. I am not sure what I am thinking. The level of the question exceeds my knowledge.

While I know we have expansion, an expansions manager and meanwhile flavours to install expansions in flocks I am unsure what combination of them is meaningful.
You might as well ask me how to write letters, how to combine them into words and sentences yet I am unable to tell what sentences are meaningful for a good story in Ooniverse.

What you mentioned sounds to me as a list of places. Scenery addons for flight simulators or points of interest (POI) in GPS systems. You can collect them by topic (all safety cameras or all gas stations) or by area (all POIs in the London area). And neither of them will make everybody happy.

Cholmondely wrote: ↑Tue May 21, 2024 1:45 pm

Not quite.

The idea is to have just the one collection of all the OXPs which "add" specifically to G2 (eg: the Ionics mission in NE G2, the Isis Interstellar station in G2, the Shrews Rights mission in G2, etc). Thus one can play Vanilla G2 - or go for the tutti-frutti G2. That way, one need not spend yonks researching which of the OXPs are "G2 OXPs".

Cholmondely wrote: ↑Tue May 21, 2024 11:59 am

Galactic OXPs
The argument against the first is that of too many flavours - and - not everybody will use OS (us AppleMacists, for example).

hiran wrote: ↑Tue May 21, 2024 9:35 pm

Cholmondely wrote: ↑Tue May 21, 2024 11:59 am

Galactic OXPs
The argument against the first is that of too many flavours - and - not everybody will use OS (us AppleMacists, for example).

I'm sorry but I do not understand why AppleMacists would not use it.
Is there someone who could describe the issue?

Cholmondely wrote: ↑Tue May 21, 2024 9:39 pm

In a nutshell, can't get it to start Oolite.

hiran wrote: ↑Tue May 21, 2024 4:01 pm

Now if in Oolite we have expansions grouped by galaxy and we know there is only one way to get around we could automatically download and install the next galaxy while the player is in this one.

Wildeblood wrote: ↑Wed May 22, 2024 9:54 am

hiran wrote: ↑Tue May 21, 2024 4:01 pm

Now if in Oolite we have expansions grouped by galaxy and we know there is only one way to get around we could automatically download and install the next galaxy while the player is in this one.

So, after all these years, someone finally thought of an advantage that could be given by the existence of the eight charts. What is the probability this thought will be implemented? Does it offset all the disadvantages?

The eight charts (yawn, "galaxies") is an 'orrible kludge, arising from Elite's 8-bit origins. It/they should have always been near the top of the list of things to get rid of*. Even if the underlying process can't be removed from the code (I'm not volunteering to learn Objective-C (?), and I don't expect anyone else to do it), there are plenty of opportunities to hide the existence, or minimize the effect, of "the eight" from/on the player.

FFS, can Oolite finally put behind it the nonsensical game mechanic where a player can jump from chart 3 to chart 4, but cannot jump from chart 4 to chart 3? The arseholes traditionalists who insist this must remain so, because "That's the way it was in 8-bit Elite", can't even be bothered to come up with some BS "lore" to explain it away. Spend five minutes deciding whether it's the aether wind, dark matter or frame dragging that flows clockwise (or is it anti-clockwise?) around the milky way, and prevents travel in the opposite direction. But wait, I forgot, they're not eight sectors in a ring around our galaxy (which would be obvious and more believable), they're eight separate galaxies. Okay, so why can we jump from 3 to 4, but not from 4 to 3? Intergalactic aether wind? If they're really eight separate galaxies, we should be able to jump from any chart to any other chart. So let's do that then?

That's all. I can't be bothered ranting at length.

* Things of which to rid ourselves, if one is a proponent of American grammar.

Cholmondely wrote: ↑Wed May 22, 2024 11:17 am

The eight charts (yawn, "galaxies") is an 'orrible kludge, arising from Elite's 8-bit origins

phkb wrote: ↑Wed May 22, 2024 12:05 pm

I would challenge the view that the 8 charts are a kludge. Yes, definitely an artifact of the 8-bit origins and galaxy seeds and so forth, but not a kludge. Bell & Braben could have left the game with just a single chart of 256 systems, which would have been perfectly fine. However, because of the way charts were created (from a couple of seed numbers), they realised they could expand the game substantially, giving the player more game. They were talked down from having more than 8 though, because at one point they were considering a infinite galaxy. So, 8 charts wasn't a kludge - it was a game design decision.