Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Fix CKAN identifiers for RCSBuildAid and HangarExtender #932

Closed
wants to merge 1 commit into from

Conversation

DrRaphello
Copy link

No description provided.

@pap1723
Copy link
Contributor

pap1723 commented Dec 9, 2018

@DrRaphello are you sure those are the proper identifiers for the 1.3.1 versions of those mods? I thought I had checked them (but there is a good chance I missed it or pulled old stuff)

@DrRaphello
Copy link
Author

@pap1723 Yes, I've just double checked on NetKAN - both were renamed when taken over by LGG and updated to 1.3

@DrRaphello
Copy link
Author

One more question - is dmagic orbital science a hard dependency now?

@pap1723
Copy link
Contributor

pap1723 commented Dec 9, 2018 via email

@Bornholio
Copy link
Contributor

not sure how but can the links be made virtual so if the original is restored (like FAR vs FAR cont. in RO now) you can use either?

@pap1723
Copy link
Contributor

pap1723 commented Dec 9, 2018 via email

@DrRaphello
Copy link
Author

hmm, I can see nothing in RO netkan file that does such a substitution. They seem to have a pretty standard definition: "depends" : [ { "name" : "FerramAerospaceResearch" }. I have not found any obvious solution in netkan specification either.
I'll ask in ckan thread anyway

@DrRaphello
Copy link
Author

it seems possible for FAR but not for these two mods: link

@DrRaphello
Copy link
Author

So, is seems possible after all based on further response from HebaruSan. However, I see possibility of old mod version revival so low that it does not make sense to ask him and LGG to spend time on this.

@pap1723
Copy link
Contributor

pap1723 commented Dec 9, 2018

Couldn't we leave both the old one and the new one as links? That way if the old one is ever reactivated, LGG drops the new one. Any drawbacks to this?

@DrRaphello
Copy link
Author

We could do this too. The only risk is an unlikely scenario where both original dev and LGG continue their separate versions.
Anyway, I consider RP-1 a finished work in the sense that vast majority of mods will never be updated for 1.3.1. It is therefore enough to install all currently available versions for 1.3.1. For this purpose both my approach will work and your approach will work.
I don't pretend to have such modding experience as you do so I leave the choice to you :)

@pap1723
Copy link
Contributor

pap1723 commented Dec 12, 2018

Commited directly to master as it affects the main netkan read by CKAN

@pap1723 pap1723 closed this Dec 12, 2018
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet

3 participants