FTB Launcher News

[jikuja]

I seem to have serious reading problems. (I deleted previous message which did not make any sense anymore)

Anyway *now* I finally understand magzie's suggestion. I won't comment repo things/extra workload required to upload packs into two different service because that's not my area(aka not my problem) and watchful already commented something. For launcher maintenance, see my previous comment.

How many players will FTB lose if no solution for people with Curse allergies is offered vs workload to maintain packs for two services + workload to maintain launcher? Probably not worth of it. I would concentrate discussion with Curse to make Curse better and have more features requested by community.

Ps. It's possible to use those scripts developed by community to download pack from Curse and then import it to MMC which means there is solution for that. I'm not why FTB should offer offical solution to download/start packs without Curse(App). Will it make people happy and who will maintain it? (repeating myself now)

 

[FyberOptic]

Talking strictly about official FTB packs, they will not be able to launch them at all from the old launcher. We will have a process in place to help people move their worlds and customizations from downloaded packs over to the curse app.

If instances are going to be moved to the Curse launcher then wouldn't it make more sense to just move all third-party stuff as well? I can't imagine what issue there would be with porting the packs, just dump the entire thing into a Curse pack's "overrides" folder and it'd be done in a jiffy. It's not like modders get credit for mods in the old launcher's packs anyway so it wouldn't really matter if they aren't downloaded through the standard mechanisms of CurseForge. If the pack author wants to voluntarily create the pack the standard way, then that would obviously be optimal. But if not, just throw it all under a "Third-Party FTB Packs" account and credit the author in the description.

I say this because I know what the FTB Launcher code base is like, and it seems like a lot of wasted (and volunteered) effort to go through this much of a conversion for a dead project.

 

[jikuja]

IIRC FTB has only permission to distribute pack via FTB launcher. Proper attribution probably is not enough if someone decides to complain.

 

[Magzie]

If instances are going to be moved to the Curse launcher then wouldn't it make more sense to just move all third-party stuff as well? I can't imagine what issue there would be with porting the packs, just dump the entire thing into a Curse pack's "overrides" folder and it'd be done in a jiffy. It's not like modders get credit for mods in the old launcher's packs anyway so it wouldn't really matter if they aren't downloaded through the standard mechanisms of CurseForge. If the pack author wants to voluntarily create the pack the standard way, then that would obviously be optimal. But if not, just throw it all under a "Third-Party FTB Packs" account and credit the author in the description.

I say this because I know what the FTB Launcher code base is like, and it seems like a lot of wasted (and volunteered) effort to go through this much of a conversion for a dead project.

Some packs use non authorized mods. When they do they can't post on their packs on curse for download.

 

[FyberOptic]

Some packs use non authorized mods. When they do they can't post on their packs on curse for download.

What exactly is a "non-authorized" mod though? Are you referring to that list that Curse keeps which dictates what you're allowed to put in your overrides? If so, I think they could bend their own rules.

 

[Watchful11]

If instances are going to be moved to the Curse launcher then wouldn't it make more sense to just move all third-party stuff as well? I can't imagine what issue there would be with porting the packs, just dump the entire thing into a Curse pack's "overrides" folder and it'd be done in a jiffy. It's not like modders get credit for mods in the old launcher's packs anyway so it wouldn't really matter if they aren't downloaded through the standard mechanisms of CurseForge. If the pack author wants to voluntarily create the pack the standard way, then that would obviously be optimal. But if not, just throw it all under a "Third-Party FTB Packs" account and credit the author in the description.

I say this because I know what the FTB Launcher code base is like, and it seems like a lot of wasted (and volunteered) effort to go through this much of a conversion for a dead project.

We already have a syncing system that lets pack authors easily move their packs over to curseforge (see details under curse syncing here). Currently it's entirely opt in for the pack authors, but I will start pushing more people to use it as we get closer.

But that doesn't address end users being able to easily move their saves and customizations over. We haven't even really looked at how it would be done, but we want to make that process as painless as possible.

 

[FyberOptic]

But that doesn't address end users being able to easily move their saves and customizations over. We haven't even really looked at how it would be done, but we want to make that process as painless as possible.

Out of curiosity I dumped the contents of an old FTB Infinity instance's "minecraft" folder into an "overrides" folder, copied a very basic manifest.json with no files, set the proper project ID from Curse, set the pack version from the "version" file in the instance folder, and that was it. CurseVoice imported the pack and knew what modpack it was, and it launched fine.

Since the old FTB Launcher uses specifically-named folders for each pack, it's easy to know what pack it is. Use a lookup table to correlate it to a Curse project ID, Minecraft version, and Forge version, so that you can spit out the tiny manifest (along with the pack version read from aforementioned "version" file in the instance).

Old packs like FTB Retro should theoretically work as well (depending on how CurseVoice handles legacy versions), but everything from "instMods" in the instance folder needs to go into "overrides/jarmods" in the modpack archive so that CurseVoice will find them.


EDIT: Looks like the modpack and thirdparty XML files for the old launcher already contain the Curse project IDs and MC version. All you need to know is the Forge version (which you might could cheat and pick latest stable).

 

[Magzie]

I just click and drag from the ftb folder saves to the doc file save for the instance pack under doc files for curse...rofl don't know if that is going to cause problems but it worked last time. Settings wise it should save those on the launcher for Minecraft?? Maybe??

 

[Magzie]

What exactly is a "non-authorized" mod though? Are you referring to that list that Curse keeps which dictates what you're allowed to put in your overrides? If so, I think they could bend their own rules.

I would love to give you more details on this but I don't make pack I only know from research on using the app and my youtube stuff. I know they have a list and you can view the list somewhere and if it isn't on the list you can't share through the site. You can still use the app and download any mod you want into the pack whether it is on the list or not just can't share it or what ever they call it. There is a link in the OP to 3 video play list that will help father explain better then me if you are still interested.

 

[jikuja]

About automated third party pack mod permissions: http://forum.feed-the-beast.com/threads/3rd-party-modpack-guidelines.18250/ :

Since this system goes through the normal FTB permission checks, it bypasses the curse permission checks, allowing you to use any mods you can get permission for.

 

[Watchful11]

Out of curiosity I dumped the contents of an old FTB Infinity instance's "minecraft" folder into an "overrides" folder, copied a very basic manifest.json with no files, set the proper project ID from Curse, set the pack version from the "version" file in the instance folder, and that was it. CurseVoice imported the pack and knew what modpack it was, and it launched fine.

Since the old FTB Launcher uses specifically-named folders for each pack, it's easy to know what pack it is. Use a lookup table to correlate it to a Curse project ID, Minecraft version, and Forge version, so that you can spit out the tiny manifest (along with the pack version read from aforementioned "version" file in the instance).

Old packs like FTB Retro should theoretically work as well (depending on how CurseVoice handles legacy versions), but everything from "instMods" in the instance folder needs to go into "overrides/jarmods" in the modpack archive so that CurseVoice will find them.


EDIT: Looks like the modpack and thirdparty XML files for the old launcher already contain the Curse project IDs and MC version. All you need to know is the Forge version (which you might could cheat and pick latest stable).

The issue with this method is that it ends up creating a "new" pack on the client side. It's not tied to the remote project, so it won't automatically get updates. We'll need something on the curse side to download the official pack, then copy over whatever is necessary from the old launcher.

I would love to give you more details on this but I don't make pack I only know from research on using the app and my youtube stuff. I know they have a list and you can view the list somewhere and if it isn't on the list you can't share through the site. You can still use the app and download any mod you want into the pack whether it is on the list or not just can't share it or what ever they call it. There is a link in the OP to 3 video play list that will help father explain better then me if you are still interested.

About automated third party pack mod permissions: http://forum.feed-the-beast.com/threads/3rd-party-modpack-guidelines.18250/ :

Curse packs can only contain mods hosted on curseforge, or contained in this list. People can request additions to that list, but only if the mod has a completely open permissions policy. FTB's third party system on the other hand lets you request permission from mod authors and submit "proof". The curse syncing system then "trusts" the FTB permission checking and bypasses the normal curse permissions checks. Previously, this allowed you to get a number of mods into packs hosted on curseforge that you wouldn't otherwise be able to.

However, a number of final hold outs have recently moved to curseforge or opened up their permissions policy. I did some analysis on a large number of packs and ended up with only a small handful of very obscure mods that would not be able to be included in a modpack directly uploaded to curseforge. When the time comes to disable the FTB launcher, and the curse syncing system, I do not foresee any permissions problems preventing people from starting to directly upload their packs to curseforge.

 

[bgh251f2]

Ps. It's possible to use those scripts developed by community to download pack from Curse and then import it to MMC which means there is solution for that. I'm not why FTB should offer offical solution to download/start packs without Curse(App). Will it make people happy and who will maintain it? (repeating myself now)

They would have to offer something like it IF Curse doesn't get a Linux version. I know they said they are "starting to test the viability of a Linux version"(whatever that means, go figure), but as far as I know we only have their word which is as much evidence as the update to Xycraft had and less evidence then the well know Redpower update had.

 

[FyberOptic]

The issue with this method is that it ends up creating a "new" pack on the client side. It's not tied to the remote project, so it won't automatically get updates. We'll need something on the curse side to download the official pack, then copy over whatever is necessary from the old launcher.

Well it is tied to the remote project when you create a manifest as I described. Though apparently when you use the CurseVoice import feature it doesn't place the manifest in the instance folder like a pack installed straight from CurseVoice would have. I even tested this with an official FTB pack on CurseVoice by exporting it then re-importing it again immediately. Still tied to the project, but unable to do updates or anything apparently.

That's going to make it much more inconvenient for you to do as you describe.

 

[Hambeau]

They would have to offer something like it IF Curse doesn't get a Linux version. I know they said they are "starting to test the viability of a Linux version"(whatever that means, go figure), but as far as I know we only have their word which is as much evidence as the update to Xycraft had and less evidence then the well know Redpower update had.

1). They don't "have" to offer anything at all.

2). "Testing the viability of a Linux launcher". As I understand things the PC and Mac launchers are partially written in C++ and have code from commercial libraries included. While C++ is included with Linux, the libraries are most likely not available for Linux and would have to be reverse engineered or functionally duplicated for a Linux client.

 

[Watchful11]

1). They don't "have" to offer anything at all.

We are committed to providing some solution for linux. If it doesn't end up being the curse app, we'll come up with something else.

 

[FyberOptic]

2). "Testing the viability of a Linux launcher". As I understand things the PC and Mac launchers are partially written in C++ and have code from commercial libraries included. While C++ is included with Linux, the libraries are most likely not available for Linux and would have to be reverse engineered or functionally duplicated for a Linux client.

The large majority (if not all) of the third-party software that they use are open-source projects. But it's not always quite as easy as just recompiling. There's still a lot of platform-specific aspects to account for.

Something I noticed in the Mac installation is that it includes many of the same C# DLLs that come in the Windows installation, complete with some of the same Windows-specific functionality that would never work on Mac or Linux (like Friend Sync for Battle.net). There's even still a Curse.exe included, although this one has very Mac-specific classes in it. Though the reason you can get away with DLLs and EXEs on a Mac is because it's just accessing the C# assemblies in them, and using native code elsewhere to actually launch.

 

[WizarDemon]

Hello. i just stumbled onto this forum and i wanted to add some stuff for ideas, or more like complaints
first off, the main part about the curse launcher that annoys me-resoource packs. I have 2 things to say.

1) unlike the FTB launcher, curse voice does not have special modpack specifics for all the resource pack. that means that you will just have to download the mod support version of your favorite resource pack, and hope it supports all the mods. now, i know its difficult to do something like that since there are so many mod packs, so how about just adding a special thing that allows you to select the modpack from your installed, and then it finds as much of the mods as possible through the resourcepack, and then make one. or something like that since i know for a fact some resourcepacks have a special texture for some blocks, but the stupid curse thing doesnt have it.

2) the curse launcher has this stupid idea of making all the texture packs separate, no matter if its the exact same thing, only with mod support. unlike FTB, curse doesnt even have the most popular of the resource packs. my favorite, Faithful, use to be on curse but for some reason it dissapeared. due to that, i avoid using the curse launcher whenever i can. i seriously hate the minecraft vanilla texture. and im not saying this just because Faithful dissapeared...it wasnt faithful to me apparently...but because the FTB launcher supports something like this. all the types of the same resourcepack, im not sure about 32x and 64x and stuff like that, but all the same types are inserted into one thing so that its easier to find it and stuff.

the Resourcepack section of the FTB launcher is suprisingly my favorite part about it. If curse is taking over, at least recreate that part please. right now, curse has a terrible resourcepack system. although i will say that it has more of a variety, right now many of the resourcepacks are based around one modpack, or one thing.

another thing, a bit smaller of a issue, would be the format. im sure this is just my opinion, but i feel like each section for each modpack is way too big. the idea of having each modpack getting enlarged in a different section is quite nice, given that it requires the players to actually click on the thing, and read it. it sort of captures the interests of the player more in my opinion, and the thing it does right now, with the modpacks showing a small portion of the modpack is actually annoying. but i will agree with the idea of adding the special icons, such as "magic" or "HQM" or even the "FTB" signs. those are very useful.

 

[bgh251f2]

1). They don't "have" to offer anything at all.

2). "Testing the viability of a Linux launcher". As I understand things the PC and Mac launchers are partially written in C++ and have code from commercial libraries included. While C++ is included with Linux, the libraries are most likely not available for Linux and would have to be reverse engineered or functionally duplicated for a Linux client.

Of course they don't have to, but they promised several times that a Linux solution would be available and not fulfilling with that would taint even more the trust the community has put on them.

C++ is a programming language that can make program for all(at least AFAIK) operational systems, just needing to compile the code for that and use the correct libraries. As FyberOptic said most libraries they use are open-source, and the ones that aren't, and are not available for Linux also, they can chose an alternative, make some kind of compatibility layer, build around it(disabling functionalities like the battle.net friend sync one) or reverse engineer it(even though it would be the worse option, because would demand far more work than needed to a project on this scope).

 

[MineYourMind]

Over the coming months new features will include the ability to download server packs from directly within the Curse app and also the ability to upload crash logs directly to FTB or the relevant pack designer. An API will also be added which will allow server hosting companies to directly access server side packs. Finally, work has started to test the viability of a Linux based client. The Curse dev team has a few Linux enthusiasts among them, so they're really excited about bringing the app to Linux.

Will there be a way to just get a direct download link to server files (like it is with FTB Launcher atm) or will it require the curse launcher to download the server files?

 

[Watchful11]

Will there be a way to just get a direct download link to server files (like it is with FTB Launcher atm) or will it require the curse launcher to download the server files?

Server files are already available through the web interface, for example at the bottom of this page. Curse is working on a better UI for server files so they are easier to find.