Recent content by Stephen Baynham

  1. S

    The Future of FTB Modpacks.

    That's not true: TConstruct-denerf|Gregtech-denerf|Result false|false|nerfed true|false|denerfed false|true|denerfed true|true|denerfed
  2. S

    The Future of FTB Modpacks.

    The good news is they don't have to- both configs work.
  3. S

    The Future of FTB Modpacks.

    Like I said, i'm pretty sure that writing to the system error log prevents minecraft from finishing startup.
  4. S

    The Future of FTB Modpacks.

    I guess to a certain extent I feel like a total ban on crashing code is too much? I think a mod ought to be allowed to say, "I will not run like this", provided: 1. It happens right at startup 2. It will always (or generally always) affect any two users running the same modpack equally 3...
  5. S

    The Future of FTB Modpacks.

    No, I'm serious, greg made it so his thing wont' crash and mDiyo made his thing configurable.
  6. S

    The Future of FTB Modpacks.

    A compromise was reached.
  7. S

    The Future of FTB Modpacks.

    He added a recipe.
  8. S

    The Future of FTB Modpacks.

    And he added a config option for his change, allowing players to once again choose to chop more trees.
  9. S

    The Future of FTB Modpacks.

    This is silly shit, crashes occur regularly, posting crashlogs is a skill every user has at this point, and greg's long-winded diatribes are more than informative enough for the person being posted to to diagnose.
  10. S

    The Future of FTB Modpacks.

    #1. If you're modifying the mod with the author's help, the author will ostensibly sign it and you'll have no issues. #2. For most mods, as long as you remove the signature, forestry and other mod-police-style mods will be copacetic. This isn't true for closed-source mods like RP2, though...
  11. S

    The Future of FTB Modpacks.

    For me, whether a particular thing is okay comes down to a few different criteria: 1) Are the users being actively punished in a way that can't be corrected? {redacted history} 2) Can the users play the way they want to with your thing intact? {redacted history} 3) Do you make clear to...
  12. S

    The Future of FTB Modpacks.

    I feel as though you'll have to give examples of what you're talking about. The only ostensibly-malicious code that I am aware of is code that 1) Attempts to respond to the mod being packed in certain modpacks that do not have permission to include the mod. or 2) Code that responds to other...
  13. S

    Mekanism: why BuildCraft support will not be included in 1.6

    What's hard to understand? "Looking on GitHub, there are some wonderful improvements - <wonderful improvements>. One minor catch, however. This update also <bad things>. You can like things about an update while still considering something else a deal-breaker.
  14. S

    Mekanism: why BuildCraft support will not be included in 1.6

    Buildcraft is open source, it belongs to the community, it's not just Power Source For Railcraft: The Mod, as CovertJaguar likes to pretend.
  15. S

    Mekanism: why BuildCraft support will not be included in 1.6

    He did provide you an example usage, and your exact words in response were "I could care less what KL is doing with TE".