It's his mod though. And really if a modpack has to ride on thaumcrafts coat tails then it needs to be reevaluated.
Sent from my iPod touch using Tapatalk
What's new in modded minecraft today?
- Thread starter Yusunoha
- Start date
-
FTB will be shutting down this forum by the end of July. To participate in our community discussions, please join our Discord! https://ftb.team/discord
Sent from my iPod touch using Tapatalk
The only way I can see Az doing this is if the bug reports start outnumbering the modpack requests. It's the only reason he wouldn't allow modpack permissions before.
Ok, I didn't know what the previous permissions were.
Lets assume I'm playing on a server. One day, the server updates and I have to update my pack. I log in, and the first thing that happens is that I fall to my death. I jumped off a cliff before I realise that my Thaumostatic Harness is gone. There's a big empty room in my base where my Thaumcraft stuff used to be. My farms are no longer being harvested, my elevators are gone, my larger rooms are all dark and full of monsters because the lamps have gone. Am I really going to carry on playing on that server? Does that mean that the pack is "riding on Thaumcraft's coat tails"? Thaumcraft is a major mod. One of the top four (IC2, BuildCraft, Thermal Expansion, Thaumcraft, I'd say). Any pack that includes it would be severely crippled by it being removed.
I sympathize that he's been swamped with bug reports from pack maintainers who don't know what they are doing. What I'd probably do is rather than restricting permissions for including in a pack, I'd restrict permissions for me taking any notice of your bug report. Most of his bugs are probably going to be found on ForgeCraft. FTB packers will probably find a bunch more. Some random guy maintiaining LulzCraft? Ignore 'em. (I made that name up, I apologise if there really is a LulzCraft that I just offended).
Let me be clear about this.
Azanor wouldn't be "that guy" who simply has a modpack remove TC from it's lineup on a whim. He wouldn't do that without good reason, such as his conditions aren't met, like he's not appropriately credited for his work or the modpack makes money for whatever reason without Azanor's knowledge, so for your hypothetical server to be forced to remove Thaumcraft would most likely be under an understandable set of circumstance, in which case I apologize, but I have no sympathy.
Now, let's assume it was on a whim that Mr. Azanor had your server pull this mod from your lineup. It would indeed be unfortunate and unfair, I agree, but at the same time that's not for you or your server to argue with. Thaumcraft belongs to him. He programmed it, he has the right to distribute it as he chooses and if someone distributes it without his permission, or consent, then they are infringing upon his ownership rights, regardless if it's fair or not and this is a very common practice that transcends the minecraft community itself, this is basic patent law. It's a dick move, man, I couldn't agree with you more in that respect, that's why I can't see your situation happening without good reason.
What I mean by "riding on the coattails" is a modpack's success or play-ability revolving around a single staple mod. It's by no means a bad thing, but you go into this knowing the risks involved. Take a modpack like Vazkii's Thaumlite for example. It was created with the sole intent to build upon Thaumcraft and mods that compliment it, such as addons and other miscellaneous mods. That uses Thaumcraft as it's foundations but at the risk of losing it's very purpose of being based on the mercy of it's creator. Bare in mind however that Thaumlite was created at a time were permission was needed directly, in which Vazkii had that permission and yet still provided due credit where it was due as to Azanor's request.
My point is, yes. I agree. It would be very unfortunate to lose such a staple mod from a line-up, but that's all it would be. Unfortunate. You would inevitably kick, scream and rant but it certainly wouldn't and shouldn't be the end of the world. The moral of this story is to abide by Azanor's friendly requests and you needn't fear the loss of the mod. It's really not a whole lot to ask when you think about it and when it comes down to it you'd find it just as reasonable if you were in his shoes. I know I would.
You're absolutely right. Nothing I said contradicts any of that. (It's copyright law not patent but I'm sure that's just a minor slip)
However, I feel I am within my rights to express my concerns, and politely ask him to give some consideration to that clause. My main concern is, if submarine clauses like that become commonplace, eventually someone will excercise one and it will cause a world of QQs. It sets a dangerous precedent. I had a similar concern over another clause, was it in Railcraft? Forestry?, where the modder said "you only have permission for my mod if you have permission for all other mods in your pack". All it takes is for one other modder to adopt the same clause, and you're into an irreconcilable precedence paradox. You need permission for each before you have permission for the other.
Maybe I just think too much.
Oh dear God... that would be bad.
An out-clause like that would make any legal expert shudder. However, I also trust that it really just wouldn't ever be an issue. And any scenario where the mod author made such a demand, the person who offended him would probably just ignore the demand anyway (for better or worse)
Well shoot. It's been a while since I've seen one of these discussions. Rather then become fodder for another moderator mistaking dry humor for hostility I'll shelf my original post for this: The Minecraft community has once again shown that it lacks a proper understanding of Copyright law. It's almost as bad as those companies that run around filing false take down notices against people obeying proper fair use.
Hopefully we'll get back on track soon and someone will tell me something juicy to play with in Rotary or Mekanism or something...
OK, I apologise for the derailment. Back on topic... has anyone else checked out VSWE's Steve's Factory Manager? I'm loving it. It's a flowchart based automation system, and he's constantly adding new features. At the moment it can move stuff around, craft things, set and detect redstone signals, check block updates, mess with your inventory (with a permissions system), access items on the ground as though they were in an inventory, and camouflage itself as other blocks.
Link if anyone wants. I had no idea this existed even though it seems 2 months old. I work with flowcharts all the time and yet this still looks terrifying.
It's surprising how much Thaumcraft has become a derail engine on this forum. It's like the anti-gregtech.
Seems he is going trough some rough times, really hope he can find the help he needs to keep going.
I've seen it. it's a really awesome mod, I just don't often post updates from it because most updates are bugfixes...
but I really want to see this mod being used more, as it's really really awesome
I wasn't reading the forums around the time that gregtech was dropped from ftb but it seems like an emotional issue for a lot of people. From what I can read on some stickies the reason it's not included in any packs is because of some "malicious code" that would cause client crashes. I'm hosting a private server based off of DW20's 1.0.14 1.6.4 that adds galacticraft and gregtech and some other things and I can confirm there were a lot of errors when I booted up with angry messages from greg. I can also confirm that these were all item ID conflicts that are trivial to resolve and so far I've been running two weeks straight without a single DC, crash, or unexpected behavior. There are 145 mods running including tinkers' construct and every quintessential tech and magic mod there is.
From the way I see it there's no legitimate reason for gregtech to not be included in FTB. Love it or hate it you can't deny that it's a large mod and adds a lot of content to tech packs. I'd love to see a proper tech challenge pack again on the launcher.
From the way I see it there's no legitimate reason for gregtech to not be included in FTB. Love it or hate it you can't deny that it's a large mod and adds a lot of content to tech packs. I'd love to see a proper tech challenge pack again on the launcher.
We are not going down this rabbit hole. Everything you need to know regarding FTB and GregTech is in this post. It's nothing new and thus doesn't belong in this thread at all.
Moving on.
You said it yourself. Malicious code. That's the reason FTB gave, and it's already been discussed, let's not go any further, thank you.
I'll clear this now and then it will rest.
1) Greg originally had some severe computer issues and did not know if he was going to be able to do updates for till 1.7 (at least from my understanding.) Obviously 1.6 has been here longer than expected. This was the first reason I said no gregtech this time around.
2) tech support on a pack with gregtech can be a nightmare sometimes figuring out were the error comes from unless gregtech is on easy mode. If I did a gregtech pack it wouldn't be on easy mode so that would leave me, and only me, to do all support for the pack. I don't have the time for that currently.
Now, the topic of why it's not in any FTB packs currently can be put to bed. Don't bring it up anymore.
1) Greg originally had some severe computer issues and did not know if he was going to be able to do updates for till 1.7 (at least from my understanding.) Obviously 1.6 has been here longer than expected. This was the first reason I said no gregtech this time around.
2) tech support on a pack with gregtech can be a nightmare sometimes figuring out were the error comes from unless gregtech is on easy mode. If I did a gregtech pack it wouldn't be on easy mode so that would leave me, and only me, to do all support for the pack. I don't have the time for that currently.
Now, the topic of why it's not in any FTB packs currently can be put to bed. Don't bring it up anymore.