About the Custom Packs! :)

[TheLoneWolfling]

Omit the conditional and you have my vote with those ideas.

 

[GearSB]

Omit the conditional and you have my vote with those ideas.

No matter how much people may dislike the idea, there will always be those mod authors who insist on approving each and every pack that carries their mod. If FTB doesn't have conditional approval, then FTB won't be able to carry those mods, and no one get's them.

With an open/closed private pack system, I don't think that there will be many mod authors who'll use the conditional permission level for there mods anyway.

But most importantly, FTB needs to make an approval system where modpack makers can contact authors for approval in a convenient way that ensures that mod authors at least see them and can say yes/no to them, and is easily verifiable by the FTB team.

As it is right now, modpack authors have to run all over the internet trying to get mod authors attention, then once they bring those permissions to the FTB team, they have to contact the authors again to verify the permissions before the modpack can be made.

 

[Dravarden]

is a flipping private pack! why do you even need permision? I can do a simple script that downloads to me and my friend always the latest version of mods if I do a pack myself, without even needing the ftb launcher, i made a pack with no permissions.

 

[Belone]

is a flipping private pack! why do you even need permision? I can do a simple script that downloads to me and my friend always the latest version of mods if I do a pack myself, without even needing the ftb launcher, i made a pack with no permissions.

I think the problem arises from that there is a lot of ambiguity over what is a private pack, I've stated it before but you never know if your pack is going to become the next big thing, and at that point you may wish you had the proper permissions. But you are right you could make a script that downloads and installs the mods, it would be a bit of a pain to maintain, but it's perfectly possible, and would work for some, but not everyone has the ability to do this.

 

[zakkord]

you need permission because a lot of the servers make money off donations.
also some mod makers don't like to see their mod bundled with some other mods

 

[MrZwij]

The giant argument seems to have made my ideas go unnoticed.

First, and the easiest to implement, is to make some sort of system for private modpack makers to ask mods for permission in one convenient place, where they know the mod authors will actually look at their requests instead of simply deleting them as spam from their inbox's.

Second, is to build an authentication system into FTB, where mod authors can choose from several permission options, such as:

1. Universal - anyone can use the mod in FTB modpacks, be it a public pack like Mindcrack, or a private pack.
2. Open - any private pack can use the mod, but not new public packs, the only security on it is the server operators distributing the code.
3. Closed - FTB implements an authentication system into itself, which limits a closed private modpack to only authorized servers and the players whitelisted on those servers. everyone on the internet can get the code for it, but it will only work for those who play on those servers. Mods with Closed permissions are only available to authorized servers and players through FTB.
4. Conditional - what we have now, where every mod pack, whether public or private, has to get permission for each one.

Which is kind of ironic considering you posted basically the same thing I did a page earlier.

http://forum.feed-the-beast.com/threads/about-the-custom-packs.6828/#post-79683

 

[GearSB]

Which is kind of ironic considering you posted basically the same thing I did a page earlier.

http://forum.feed-the-beast.com/threads/about-the-custom-packs.6828/#post-79683

Not quite. You only suggest a public, private, and default permission levels.

My post added the ideas of an official FTB system to give FTB modpack authors a way to ask for permission that won't be deleted as spam, and proposes the idea of an authentication system, which would solve many problems that mod authors would have with private packs.

 

[MrZwij]

Not quite. You only suggest a public, private, and default permission levels.

My post added the ideas of an official FTB system to give FTB modpack authors a way to ask for permission that won't be deleted as spam, and proposes the idea of an authentication system, which would solve many problems that mod authors would have with private packs.

Actually that's pretty much what I said as well. My point was not to give them every possible option for level of permission (slowpoke and his team would do a better job on the specifics than we would), but to lay out the framework for a system where mod authors don't have to be asked by every single server owner wanting a private pack. You did flesh it out a bit more though. That's OK, it's a good idea and deserves to be thought about.

 

[weels1566]

Where are the links to get my own pack?

 

[Dravarden]

Where are the links to get my own pack?

Cant you read the first page? Go ask mod makers for permission, have a proof, then come back and show it.

 

[danidas]

More likely go to mod makers get permissions, show them to slowpoke/mod pack devs, have them verify them. Wait for them to give you a private pack code or reject your request.

 

[urmamasllama]

the going viral issue is easily solved by having a whitelist to download the pack the whitelist of course would need to have a restricted size cap 100 or so? i've got nearly 50 people whitelisted on my server and it is completely private no public advertising at all

 

[Spoo]

the going viral issue is easily solved by having a whitelist to download the pack the whitelist of course would need to have a restricted size cap 100 or so? i've got nearly 50 people whitelisted on my server and it is completely private no public advertising at all

This is a good idea. It keeps the modpack personal, and should also satisfy any permissions issues (at least with a small whitelist). After all, if I put together a server for my friends and family, the point is to save more time for playing. Hunting down permissions defeats that point.

 

[ShneekeyTheLost]

the going viral issue is easily solved by having a whitelist to download the pack the whitelist of course would need to have a restricted size cap 100 or so? i've got nearly 50 people whitelisted on my server and it is completely private no public advertising at all

While we're wishing for pipe dreams, how about just wishing anyone logging onto a server uses the server's mods/config folders instead of the ones in the client's folder, which would obviate the whole mess in the first place.

 

[DrCeph]

A slight frame change of what some people are saying, perhaps to help get the message across clearer:

The alternative that people are suggesting would be called, in other dev circles, a remix as opposed to a modpack.

Ideal (and in my opinion entirely reasonable) scenario :
1. There would be a list of mods in the FTB launcher that have been configured to work together in a big 'ultimate' modpack. They have appropriate permissions to be in that modpack, and remixes of that modpack from the developer.
2. The author of a remix selects the mods they would like in their personalised 'remixed' pack.
- an example of this might be adding mystcraft to the mindcrack modpack.
- another example might be creating a fresh pack with only IC2, gregtech and railcraft.
3. The author gets a code that represents this combination of mods, which would happen to be the same code should another author select the same mods - essentially a hash of the mod names, or something like that.
4. Adding this code to your launcher will create a remix of the ultimate pack that is identical across players and any server that implements the same code.

If the FTB guys and gals can keep a list of mods that have open FTB modpack permissions, or explicitly get remix permissions for the more restricted mods this would be a very useful, powerful and unique solution.

Notes:
The modpack author may be a server owner, or simply a private player.
This keeps the config file reigns with the FTB guys which makes many of the mod owners happy as they know the mods will be configured correctly (I sure as hell know that it minimises support issues for PetroGen). A pain point for many developers is with ill-configured mods due to inexperience, hence why they like to give permission to reputable modpack compilers so they don't get the same support questions over and over.

 

[ratchet freak]

then what about the config settings, most admins like tweaking them, (one of the reasons for the private packs)

 

[Dravarden]

A slight frame change of what some people are saying, perhaps to help get the message across clearer:

The alternative that people are suggesting would be called, in other dev circles, a remix as opposed to a modpack.

Ideal (and in my opinion entirely reasonable) scenario :
1. There would be a list of mods in the FTB launcher that have been configured to work together in a big 'ultimate' modpack. They have appropriate permissions to be in that modpack, and remixes of that modpack from the developer.
2. The author of a remix selects the mods they would like in their personalised 'remixed' pack.
- an example of this might be adding mystcraft to the mindcrack modpack.
- another example might be creating a fresh pack with only IC2, gregtech and railcraft.
3. The author gets a code that represents this combination of mods, which would happen to be the same code should another author select the same mods - essentially a hash of the mod names, or something like that.
4. Adding this code to your launcher will create a remix of the ultimate pack that is identical across players and any server that implements the same code.

If the FTB guys and gals can keep a list of mods that have open FTB modpack permissions, or explicitly get remix permissions for the more restricted mods this would be a very useful, powerful and unique solution.

Notes:
The modpack author may be a server owner, or simply a private player.
This keeps the config file reigns with the FTB guys which makes many of the mod owners happy as they know the mods will be configured correctly (I sure as hell know that it minimises support issues for PetroGen). A pain point for many developers is with ill-configured mods due to inexperience, hence why they like to give permission to reputable modpack compilers so they don't get the same support questions over and over.

thats more or less what I said 2 or 3 pages ago

 

[DrCeph]

then what about the config settings, most admins like tweaking them, (one of the reasons for the private packs)

Yup, that is true. For minor server-side tweaks that would be OK. Wider changes and then I guess you are going into private pack territory. I think both systems have a place and are complementary to each other.[DOUBLEPOST=1358327179][/DOUBLEPOST]

thats more or less what I said 2 or 3 pages ago

Reread the very first sentence.

 

[Hydra]

No matter how much people may dislike the idea, there will always be those mod authors who insist on approving each and every pack that carries their mod. If FTB doesn't have conditional approval, then FTB won't be able to carry those mods, and no one get's them.

I think the community as a whole should just speak out and simply boycott those mods. If you don't want your mod to be played by 'everybody' then be prepared to not have it played by anybody. But that's just my opinion. The whole "awmagawd copyright" issue is getting pretty ridiculous. In most modding communities the mod makes make them because they love the game and give it away for free. The MC community seems to be different because Notch made craptons of money off MC and some modmakers seem to want a piece of that pie.

 

[GearSB]

a piece of the pie?

Even the most popular modmakers like Eloraam only make enough to run their webisites and have a bit of lunch money left over.

Mod makers make their mods for fun, and if they don't approve of a modpack, then they are fully in their rights to not let their mod be in it.

You don't want to use it?

Fine.

Mod makers are under no obligation to make their mods, or even release them. If you don't like how they make and organize their mods, then you are of course fully capable of not using them.