Talk:Compatibility - Revision history

Gaxkang55: /* Resource scope edit */

2011-01-10T08:26:18Z

‎Resource scope edit

Proleric1: /* Resource scope edit */

2011-01-08T11:45:43Z

‎Resource scope edit

Proleric1: /* Resource scope edit */

2011-01-08T11:43:08Z

‎Resource scope edit

Gaxkang55: /* Resource scope edit */

2011-01-08T07:56:13Z

‎Resource scope edit

Ladydesire at 23:26, 6 January 2011

2011-01-06T23:26:58Z

Ladydesire at 23:26, 6 January 2011

2011-01-06T23:26:38Z

Proleric1: /* Resource scope edit */

2011-01-04T17:16:58Z

‎Resource scope edit

Proleric1: /* Resource scope edit */

2011-01-04T08:42:21Z

‎Resource scope edit

Proleric1: /* Resource scope edit */

2011-01-04T08:40:33Z

‎Resource scope edit

Proleric1 at 08:38, 4 January 2011

2011-01-04T08:38:31Z

← Older revision		Revision as of 08:26, 10 January 2011
Line 145:		Line 145:
	@ladydesire : you might want to do an edit to capture your thoughts above. I don't disagree, but you know a lot more than I about how to mod the OC.		@ladydesire : you might want to do an edit to capture your thoughts above. I don't disagree, but you know a lot more than I about how to mod the OC.
	[[User:Proleric1\|Proleric1]] 11:43, 8 January 2011 (UTC)		[[User:Proleric1\|Proleric1]] 11:43, 8 January 2011 (UTC)
		+	--------------
		+	That edit looks fine to me.
		+
		+	On the separate issue of what should be in the core and what in the module folders of you <uid> folder, I am actually scheduled to do some testing on this very question for my own campaign (in dev), and will return to this issue for this page in a week or two --[[User:Gaxkang55\|Gaxkang55]] 08:26, 10 January 2011 (UTC)

@@ Line 141: / Line 141: @@
 Just on the term "deprecated", this is really a technical term in software development and deployment, and does not carry a value judgement. It simply means a superseded method that should no longer be used. This is a developer not a player wiki, and the use of the term is entirely appropriate, imho --[[User:Gaxkang55|Gaxkang55]] 07:56, 8 January 2011 (UTC)
 -------------
-OK I had a go at rewording, to emphasise that it is the technique which is deprecated, not the mods. Only players have the power to deprecate (i.e. cease using and/or archive) mods, which I've reiterated in the form of a link to the Disclaimer section. What do you think? [[User:Proleric1|Proleric1]] 11:43, 8 January 2011 (UTC)
+OK I had a go at rewording, to emphasise that it is the technique which is deprecated, not the mods. Only players have the power to deprecate (i.e. cease using and/or archive) mods, which I've reiterated in the form of a link to the Disclaimer section. What do you think?

← Older revision		Revision as of 11:43, 8 January 2011
Line 140:		Line 140:
	-------------		-------------
	Just on the term "deprecated", this is really a technical term in software development and deployment, and does not carry a value judgement. It simply means a superseded method that should no longer be used. This is a developer not a player wiki, and the use of the term is entirely appropriate, imho --[[User:Gaxkang55\|Gaxkang55]] 07:56, 8 January 2011 (UTC)		Just on the term "deprecated", this is really a technical term in software development and deployment, and does not carry a value judgement. It simply means a superseded method that should no longer be used. This is a developer not a player wiki, and the use of the term is entirely appropriate, imho --[[User:Gaxkang55\|Gaxkang55]] 07:56, 8 January 2011 (UTC)
		+	-------------
		+	OK I had a go at rewording, to emphasise that it is the technique which is deprecated, not the mods. Only players have the power to deprecate (i.e. cease using and/or archive) mods, which I've reiterated in the form of a link to the Disclaimer section. What do you think? [[User:Proleric1\|Proleric1]] 11:43, 8 January 2011 (UTC)

← Older revision		Revision as of 07:56, 8 January 2011
Line 138:		Line 138:

	On 3, since most players assume that the modder knows best, or are from a game where adding mods can only be done in a specific directory (TES III and TES IV, Fallot 3 and Fallout: New Vegas, just for a few examples), they won't be the ones to complain about having to do that. We should be suggesting the use of modules/Single Player/override for Origins content, addins/<uid>/module/override for things for DLCs (where uid is the folder name of the specific DLC (I listed several of them in the Module Priority tutorial) instead of packages/core/override if a mod '''must''' use the override. The only mods that need to be done this way are compatibility files for various mods that might be editing the same files, at least as far as I'm concerned; everything else should be done as dazips. [[User:Ladydesire\|Ladydesire]] 23:26, 6 January 2011 (UTC)		On 3, since most players assume that the modder knows best, or are from a game where adding mods can only be done in a specific directory (TES III and TES IV, Fallot 3 and Fallout: New Vegas, just for a few examples), they won't be the ones to complain about having to do that. We should be suggesting the use of modules/Single Player/override for Origins content, addins/<uid>/module/override for things for DLCs (where uid is the folder name of the specific DLC (I listed several of them in the Module Priority tutorial) instead of packages/core/override if a mod '''must''' use the override. The only mods that need to be done this way are compatibility files for various mods that might be editing the same files, at least as far as I'm concerned; everything else should be done as dazips. [[User:Ladydesire\|Ladydesire]] 23:26, 6 January 2011 (UTC)
		+	-------------
		+	Just on the term "deprecated", this is really a technical term in software development and deployment, and does not carry a value judgement. It simply means a superseded method that should no longer be used. This is a developer not a player wiki, and the use of the term is entirely appropriate, imho --[[User:Gaxkang55\|Gaxkang55]] 07:56, 8 January 2011 (UTC)

← Older revision		Revision as of 23:26, 6 January 2011
Line 137:		Line 137:
	-------------		-------------

−	On 3, since most players assume that the modder knows best, or are from a game where adding mods can only be done in a specific directory (TES III and TES IV, Fallot 3 and Fallout: New Vegas, just for a few examples), they won't be the ones to complain about having to do that. We should be suggesting the use of modules/Single Player/override for Origins content, addins/<uid>/module/override for things for DLCs (where uid is the folder name of the specific DLC (I listed several of them in the Module Priority tutorial) instead of packages/core/override if a mod '''must''' use the override. The only mods that need to be done this way are compatibility files for various mods that might be editing the same files, at least as far as I'm concerned; everything else should be done as dazips.	+	On 3, since most players assume that the modder knows best, or are from a game where adding mods can only be done in a specific directory (TES III and TES IV, Fallot 3 and Fallout: New Vegas, just for a few examples), they won't be the ones to complain about having to do that. We should be suggesting the use of modules/Single Player/override for Origins content, addins/<uid>/module/override for things for DLCs (where uid is the folder name of the specific DLC (I listed several of them in the Module Priority tutorial) instead of packages/core/override if a mod '''must''' use the override. The only mods that need to be done this way are compatibility files for various mods that might be editing the same files, at least as far as I'm concerned; everything else should be done as dazips. [[User:Ladydesire\|Ladydesire]] 23:26, 6 January 2011 (UTC)

← Older revision		Revision as of 23:26, 6 January 2011
Line 135:		Line 135:

	3. Agreed. However, the wiki is about practical advice. The section in question talks about deprecating other people's stuff, which is beyond the reader's control! Instead, I suggest a two-pronged approach. Firstly, we already have the Disclaimer section of this article. Secondly, contribute to the [http://social.bioware.com/project/3966/ project] which is developing an FAQ for players. Just my 2 cents. [[User:Proleric1\|Proleric1]] 08:33, 4 January 2011 (UTC)		3. Agreed. However, the wiki is about practical advice. The section in question talks about deprecating other people's stuff, which is beyond the reader's control! Instead, I suggest a two-pronged approach. Firstly, we already have the Disclaimer section of this article. Secondly, contribute to the [http://social.bioware.com/project/3966/ project] which is developing an FAQ for players. Just my 2 cents. [[User:Proleric1\|Proleric1]] 08:33, 4 January 2011 (UTC)
		+	-------------
		+
		+	On 3, since most players assume that the modder knows best, or are from a game where adding mods can only be done in a specific directory (TES III and TES IV, Fallot 3 and Fallout: New Vegas, just for a few examples), they won't be the ones to complain about having to do that. We should be suggesting the use of modules/Single Player/override for Origins content, addins/<uid>/module/override for things for DLCs (where uid is the folder name of the specific DLC (I listed several of them in the Module Priority tutorial) instead of packages/core/override if a mod '''must''' use the override. The only mods that need to be done this way are compatibility files for various mods that might be editing the same files, at least as far as I'm concerned; everything else should be done as dazips.

@@ Line 132: / Line 132: @@
 . Thanks.
-. Ironically, gender is one string that isn't affected by the bug. Why? Because the bug only occurs when you load a saved game, whereas gender is only used in character creation IIRC. I'm very keen to find another way round this bug, but so far I've failed.
+. Issue closed. EDIT [[User:Proleric1|Proleric1]] 17:16, 4 January 2011 (UTC) It is not necessary to put a talk table in packages override. Instead of changing core strings, it's better to refer to new strings in the 2DA files (even though finding them is a lot of work when making a global change, such as "Marabi" to "Dog". The gender description string does have to be overridden, but since it's only used in character generation, it's not affected by the save-load bug.
 . Agreed. However, the wiki is about practical advice. The section in question talks about deprecating other people's stuff, which is beyond the reader's control! Instead, I suggest a two-pronged approach. Firstly, we already have the Disclaimer section of this article. Secondly, contribute to the [http://social.bioware.com/project/3966/ project] which is developing an FAQ for players. Just my 2 cents. [[User:Proleric1|Proleric1]] 08:33, 4 January 2011 (UTC)

← Older revision		Revision as of 08:42, 4 January 2011
Line 134:		Line 134:
	2. Ironically, gender is one string that isn't affected by the bug. Why? Because the bug only occurs when you load a saved game, whereas gender is only used in character creation IIRC. I'm very keen to find another way round this bug, but so far I've failed.		2. Ironically, gender is one string that isn't affected by the bug. Why? Because the bug only occurs when you load a saved game, whereas gender is only used in character creation IIRC. I'm very keen to find another way round this bug, but so far I've failed.

−	3. Agreed. However, the wiki is about practical advice. The section in question talks about deprecating other people's stuff, which is beyond the reader's control! Instead, I suggest a two-pronged approach. Firstly, we already have the Disclaimer section of this article. Secondly, contribute to the [[http://social.bioware.com/project/3966/ \| project]] which is developing an FAQ for players. Just my 2 cents. [[User:Proleric1\|Proleric1]] 08:33, 4 January 2011 (UTC)	+	3. Agreed. However, the wiki is about practical advice. The section in question talks about deprecating other people's stuff, which is beyond the reader's control! Instead, I suggest a two-pronged approach. Firstly, we already have the Disclaimer section of this article. Secondly, contribute to the [http://social.bioware.com/project/3966/ project] which is developing an FAQ for players. Just my 2 cents. [[User:Proleric1\|Proleric1]] 08:33, 4 January 2011 (UTC)

@@ Line 107: / Line 107: @@
 Also beefed up the recommendations about not putting files into packages --[[User:Gaxkang55|Gaxkang55]] 12:43, 30 December 2010 (UTC)
-===============
+-------------
 Good update! I'm very much on the same wavelength. I have one question, though, concerning the Talk Table. Normally, the best way to change a core string is to make a new one, then point the appropriate 2DA at it. However, there are cases where no such mechanism exists. For example, if you want to make a module that isn't set in the Ferelden gameworld, you need to change the gender descriptions, replace all instances of "marabi" with "dog" and so on. To the best of my knowledge, this can't be done without an override - see [[String_editor]]. If there's a better solution, I'd be keen to hear it. [[User:Proleric1|Proleric1]] 08:50, 31 December 2010 (UTC)
-===============
+-------------
 As it happens, I had to do exactly that for the campaign I have in development, where I wanted to override the gender description. Create the string but make the Owner Module your module. This will be exported to the talktable placed in your core, and will overwrite the core string as long as your module is enabled. Also tested the head morph stuff, and that doesn't need to be in packages either, so will make a further update. --[[User:Gaxkang55|Gaxkang55]] 04:28, 3 January 2011 (UTC)
-===============
+-------------
 Have you tried to reproduce this [[Bug:_Talk_table_exported_to_packages_override | bug]] for the specific string mentioned there? I double-checked that the Owner Module is set correctly. It isn't exported to the talk table in core (which seems to be empty), nor does it work if the talk table in packages override is moved to any of the add-in folders.
@@ Line 119: / Line 119: @@
 You've added some strong words about mods that use packages override. My heart is with you, but my head says the tone could be counter-productive. We seem to be making some progress with persuading the community that compatibility is important, but the "package overriders" are still in the majority. IMO we need to convince them to change their approach voluntarily, not antagonise them. After all, none of us has the power to deprecate anything (nor would we wish to have it). What do you think? [[User:Proleric1|Proleric1]] 08:27, 3 January 2011 (UTC)
-===============
+-------------
 Moving the compiled scripts and exported plots out of the toolsetexport folder '''into''' the override folder is a good idea, since when doing an "empty export directories", you could accidently delete files needed for the builder to player package. I'm not sure why it would be necessary to move files out of the override folder.
 As far as the "package overriders" go, some may never change, no matter what we do; I have even seen people that were doing it basically the right way change because they weren't wanting to build multiple packages for their mods. [[User:Ladydesire|Ladydesire]] 00:03, 4 January 2011 (UTC)
-===============
+-------------
 . I have deleted the sentence about DAZIPs. On re-reading it actually compresses together two different ideas, and in any case doesn't really belong there. I will have a rethink about this when I have a bit more time on the weekend :-)
@@ Line 129: / Line 129: @@
 . On the issue of packages override, the issue is whether or not this wiki contains correct information and procedures. If someone disagrees that this is the correct procedure (particularly in terms of mod inter-compatibility), I am more than happy to have the discussion. I suspect real change is only going to happen if the end-users start complaining in the comments sections of the download pages, but that's another story. In the meantime, the wiki should stick to the straight and narrow of providing the best information we can assemble --[[User:Gaxkang55|Gaxkang55]] 04:37, 4 January 2011 (UTC)
-===============
+-------------
 . Thanks.

@@ Line 3: / Line 3: @@
 I moved this section here because it's under discussion. [[User:Proleric1|Proleric1]] 08:27, 21 July 2010 (UTC)
-===============
+-------------
 NOTE: