Weird people. I'd just wait for 1.9 in a couple weeks and see if that has anything worth while. 1.8 is literally useless and takes more work to update than it gives back.
Recent Events Discussion (RED) Thread
- Thread starter VapourDrive
- Start date
-
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
Those that are understand that they're going to have to move on eventually. Forge is no longer getting support. But like every migration up from 1.2.5 it's been a horrific slog of dealing with minecraft's code base changing almost entirely. So the early adopters are early, and then at some point the tide will turn and the proportions will reverse.
It depends on how complex the mod is. Mods that don't add anything that has to be rendered will generally have it easier.
Well the thing is, most versions from 1.2.5 made something easier. 1.3 removed separation from client/server mods and made one universal mod. 1.4->1.6 was easy. 1.7 wasn't bad, but it removed ids so it was worth it. 1.8 changes rendering into something awful and annoying to deal with, but doesn't make anything easier.
Most mods have some kind of rendering. There are very few that I can think of that don't.
From what I understand, the rendering changes in 1.8 aren't due to Minecraft itself, but due to Lex deciding to ignore all modders and force people to use the new system by removing the old rendering hooks. Are those changes not going to be moved forward with newer versions of Forge?
Wrong. Rendering in vanilla Minecraft changed significantly. Lex can't simply provide the same hooks as before because the hooks' targets don't exist anymore or have changed significantly.
Yes they would have to reimplement the hooks. Although, Lex doesn't touch rendering so it wouldn't be him
Also, there are several working fixes for the problem that have been PRed just none accepted AFAIK
dmillerw's fix has 20 lines of code. Also, Mojang uses the same hook for liquids.
Wait. Does that mean BuildCraft 2.2.15?
The first version was BuildCraft 1.4.1 for beta 1.4. Also, you didn't get it.This system could mean Buildcraft 0.1.
2.2.14 is the final 2.2.x release for Minecraft 1.2.5
Ah... only if you want to code it. There could be good work for anyone who can get permission to work on those old versions. After all they are going to be rather buggy.
If buildcraft is open source that should apply retroactively to all past versions.
Not per se. However if an open source version of Buildcraft contains an older proprietary version as subset I am of course free to extract it.
No but if you release SquidUtils under GPL without any specific version number attached to it it would count for all past versions. As it changes the license of the squidUrils property as a whole. And even if the next version was not released like that any code it shared with the old version would still be under GPL. And even the name it's self would still be under the GPL.
IIRC the GPL is a "contagious" license (which is why the some people do not consider it as really "free") so if you were to release a mod under GPL, any new version containing parts of the code under GPL must be released under GPL too.
Yes but if you're the (sole) copyright holder you don't have to obey this.
Well the copyleft's purpose is to make sure that derivatives remain free. It's definitely more free than not being allowed to make any derivatives. It can indeed be problematic when imcompatible licenses clash.
You all should read this article I wrote. With its research, I found that BuildCraft code only became open-source with version 2.2.5, under the MMPLv1. Previous versions were "All rights reserved".
