(Xeno's Reliquary) It's back for 1.6!

  • Please make sure you are posting in the correct place. Server ads go here and modpack bugs go here
  • The FTB Forum is now read-only, and is here as an archive. To participate in our community discussions, please join our Discord! https://ftb.team/discord
T

TheMike

New Member
Jul 29, 2019
23
0
0
Hello! I'm fairly new to the FTB forums, but recently due to x3n0 working (reason here, http://goo.gl/bC7271, along with confirmation), I now maintain development of Reliquary. With all the buzz about the new FTB 1.6.4 modpacks, I made a build (1.1.1, my versioning with his code being 1.0) that should be suitable for use in modpacks and servers. This is a small incremental update to prepare worlds for Reliquary 1.2, which should be out in about 15 days *hint hint*.

Anyway, enjoy! https://github.com/TrainerGuy22/Reliquary/releases/tag/1.1.1

(And if there are bugs, please report them on the Github bug tracker)
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Geometry, Museli, xbony2 and 7 others
:) I'm glad to see XR return! It has a great mix of nice magic items. Do you have any new items you're planning on adding that you'd like to mention, or would rather keep things secret?
 
TheMike said:
Hello! I'm fairly new to the FTB forums, but recently due to x3n0 working (reason here, http://goo.gl/bC7271, along with confirmation), I now maintain development of Reliquary. With all the buzz about the new FTB 1.6.4 modpacks, I made a build (1.1.1, my versioning with his code being 1.0) that should be suitable for use in modpacks and servers. This is a small incremental update to prepare worlds for Reliquary 1.2, which should be out in about 15 days *hint hint*.

Anyway, enjoy! https://github.com/TrainerGuy22/Reliquary/releases/tag/1.1.1

(And if there are bugs, please report them on the Github bug tracker)
Click to expand...
Can this be put in modpacks?

(Also, can I put it in mine ;) )
 
YAY! Was one of the mods I was sad wasn't in the new monster pack. Lets hope it will be in the future!
 
TheMike said:
Hello! I'm fairly new to the FTB forums, but recently due to x3n0 working (reason here, http://goo.gl/bC7271, along with confirmation), I now maintain development of Reliquary. With all the buzz about the new FTB 1.6.4 modpacks, I made a build (1.1.1, my versioning with his code being 1.0) that should be suitable for use in modpacks and servers. This is a small incremental update to prepare worlds for Reliquary 1.2, which should be out in about 15 days *hint hint*.

Anyway, enjoy! https://github.com/TrainerGuy22/Reliquary/releases/tag/1.1.1

(And if there are bugs, please report them on the Github bug tracker)
Click to expand...

already saw your update on the MCF, have been using it since it got out
I'm really happy to see it being updated as there's really some items I love to use

could you perhaps tell us if you're planning anything new with Reliquary or are you simply just going to update the mod with each new minecraft version?
 
SonOfABirch said:
and? The fact that it's open source does not imply permissions to include it in a modpack.
Click to expand...
Yes it does.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Open_source
Wikipedia said:
In production and development, open source as a development model promotes a) universal access via free license to a product's design or blueprint, and b) universal redistribution of that design or blueprint, including subsequent improvements to it by anyone.
Click to expand...
http://opensource.com/resources/what-open-source
opensource.com said:
Open source software is different. Its authors make its source code available to others who would like to view that code, copy it, learn from it, alter it, or share it.
Click to expand...
"Open Source" is a registered trademark, and there are rules about using the term, including that the software has to be freely redistributable.
 
  • Like
Reactions: xbony2
Are the configs / id's compatable with the master configs shipped with the FTB 1.6.4 packs ?
Or is some manual i'd resolving required ?

Edit: ok nvm. I just tried it out in the DW pack and no conflicts. Works straight out of the box.

Thank you for taking the time to do a 1.6.4 update. I look forward to Reliquary 1.2
 
Last edited:
Lathanael said:
You need to learn the difference between "Open Source" (LGPL, GPL, CC etc.) and "Visible Source" (Reika's mods for example)
Click to expand...

What he said. Open source means more than the source is visible. There are certain requirements that are required for "open source". Reliquary uses the GPLv3 license. It is a open-source approved license. GPLv3 requires you to have access to the source code to every release of the mod, and the ability to freely redistribute it (granted that the source code is always available somewhere). So, anyone who said "It's open source." would be correct.
 
  • Like
Reactions: SpitefulFox and Siro
I'm glad to see someone continuing this mod. It's been a long time favorite of mine.
 
PhilHibbs said:
Yes it does.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Open_source

http://opensource.com/resources/what-open-source

"Open Source" is a registered trademark, and there are rules about using the term, including that the software has to be freely redistributable.
Click to expand...

That last remark is simply untrue. You can be as 'Open Sourced' As you want, and charge as much as you want for the compiled binary or refuse to allow redistribution of it completely if you want.

Not true of all licenses, but not all open source is LGPL either.

Open Source == Free as in Freedom, but not Free as in Beer.
 
Ok. Can we all please stop this from turning into a 'what defines open source' battle arena? Short and simple answer is, yes, you can use it in your modpack, and thanks for being polite.

xbony2 said:
Woot! Do you have any other mods? I haven't heard of you before :p
Click to expand...

I've popped my head around ModJam a few times, as well as making a few side mods (they were beginner mods I made about a year ago, not really worth much). As a matter of fact, I'll be doing ModJam III this coming weekend with Briman.
 
  • Like
Reactions: SatanicSanta, xbony2, jokermatt999 and 3 others
I've been messing around with the Wraith's Eye a little for 1.2, using a hammer to smash little bugs.

Due to a NBT format change, I have to convert the old format to the new format, so pre-existing Wraith's Eye(s) don't crash when you try to use them (it fixes a fairly big bug, actually two). However, I haven't tested it a ton. So I'm asking the community to help beta test this feature. So, before you test, bind like 10 Wraith Nodes, and then see if they work correctly once your using the source build. As always, every bug test and every issue is a huge help for a bug-less Reliquary, so thanks!

Changelog: https://github.com/TrainerGuy22/Reliquary/commit/738cf8db0cf0dcd9c8d16ae8a6b5e3c98138451b
 
  • Like
Reactions: jokermatt999 and PierceSG
malianx said:
That last remark is simply untrue. You can be as 'Open Sourced' As you want, and charge as much as you want for the compiled binary or refuse to allow redistribution of it completely if you want.
Click to expand...
OK, I accept that my trademark statement was technically incorrect, I was thinking of the "Open Source Initiative" trademark. Nonetheless, if you are using "Open Source" in a sense that does not allow redistribution, then you are using a definition of the term that is not commonly recognized. The main difference between the broad definition of Open Source and the GPL is that the GPL forbids the recipient from imposing further restrictions on derivitave works.
Clause 1 of the Open Source Definition could have been written with modpacks specifically in mind:
OSD said:
1. Free Redistribution
The license shall not restrict any party from selling or giving away the software as a component of an aggregate software distribution containing programs from several different sources. The license shall not require a royalty or other fee for such sale.
Click to expand...
Ashzification said:
I don't care about the source, it's still polite to ask first :p
Click to expand...
It's polite to say thank you, but I would say that asking for permission when permission has already been explicitly granted is actually a bit rude. It's wasting someone's time, implying that they have an obligation to reply that they have taken steps to avoid. If someone posted on their web site and official forum thread "You can use this in a mod pack", would you still ask them if you could use it in a mod pack? Same thing.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom