230 réponses à ce sujet

[kamalpoe]

Olblach wrote...

You just make this system unable to run without you... Not blaming you if you think that's the only thing to do however this is not for me.

Anyone can be the person to make the haks/changes. They are agreed upon by the PW's using them. The system would continue if he were "hit by a bus". He is simply the person who does them now.

[painofdungeoneternal]

What i said is if you don't know how to do it, i can do it for you. How it's done is decided by those who are in the community, which is best represented by those who choose to visit IRC.

There is a lot of not understanding what i am saying.

Note that everything i am describing is completely decentralized. Unlike the CEP it works just like and is in many ways the vault, its not a package you use, but a set of standards and ideals which as long as you follow you can use.

The only restriction is everything which is done needs to have some approval by someone very skilled in QA work, which can be from one of the leading PW's, or someone who understands a lot of the issues in content management and things which later on can become big issues. Or it can be someone like hellfire who has very high standards in models and placeables.

Modifié par painofdungeoneternal, 29 octobre 2010 - 02:17 .

[dunniteowl]

What I see happening here is looking for excuses to make things harder.

What if this, what if that?

The simple truth is this: You want less overall downloading. To get that, having many different names for the same thing simply because folks won't use a standard hak and build from there is going to be just as much a problem as having this one all inclusive GIGA hak like an NWN2 CEP would ultimately have to become.

The autodownloader CAN be used by pointing to haks on the vault if you wish to. It's slower than a Dropbox account, but it could achieve the same things -- just longer. The autodownloader is NOT going to save you anything if everyone takes a standard hak, then modifies it for their PW or SP module and then renames it. That totally defeats the purpose.

The whole point of the autodownloader and ADL compliant haks is to reduce the madness of redundant downloads. If you just gotta have versioning for every little change, then you're simply taking a situation and making it harder to use and defeating the elegance of the system's potential through no other reason than simple, plain old, stubborn inability to change to meet the technology.

There's no other way to say it.

I caution others who are arguing one way or the other to stop making these straw man "what if" arguments for no other reason than to find fault with something. It doesn't help. You know what? If you want to find faults, GET ON BOARD and WORK WITH IT!

That way, if a fault is found, instead of sitting on the sidelines and wisely nodding your head, saying, "I knew it wouldn't work, I told yas," you can inform the rest of the folks already using it, point it out and work to a solution instead of making up excuses.

Look it's simple. If you don't want to use it, don't use it.

I think that's a big mistake myself. Not just for those who refuse to adopt it, but to the Community as a whole. The autodownloader is one of those super underappreciated things that was developed and designed to do things differently based on feedback by members of the Community who's biggest concerns were the extreme clunkiness and inefficiency of the way things were before the autodownloader and were, to some degree, addressed by WorldGate and AuDoLo. In fact, I am pretty sure that many features that those two external programs had were addressed in the autodownloader. The real difference is the autodownloader is now an integral aspect of Online Play, there's no hooking into it required.

Again, we're looking at not only resistance to change in the mix, we're also dealing with the flip side of that coin -- what's wrong with doing it like we've always done?

What's wrong with it is: It is going to continue to punish the players with unnecessary and redundant downloads. I don't care if you want versioning, but if you're insisting on it to join in the autodownloader then you simply don't get the process in the first place. Having multiple versoins of any hak simply means you're creating competition and redundancy of much of what's in each version when the fact is that everyone should be able to look at the base models and files and agree that such commonality should be left as is, named, locked and all the other minor variations should be compiled into the Module's or PW's unique Hak files. End of issue.

And while I say the player does not require input into how all this works, it does NOT ignore the players. In fact it's ALL ABOUT the Players.

All this takes place 'under the hood' of the game's client. The player doesn't have to know how it works to benefit from it. The whole idea was designed to benefit the player by creating a feature and system that supports killing off that redundant and repeated download of the same content. That's the WHOLE POINT.

So, while PW Admins, SP Module Builders and Content Creators have to have some common ground for guidelines and operations, the Player only has to connect, get the new and unique files they don't already have -- and then start playing.

The rest of this discussion is nothing more than heel dragging and plain old stubborn refusal to see the benefits without being suspicious of something new. And if you can't see that, then the best thing to do would be to step back and continue to do things the old way, because it's obviously only what you're ready and willing to have. Now for those people who really don't like change, I do have some tin cans and fishing line I can hook to your computer and connect to your ISP if that would make you feel more comfortable.

Otherwise, the discussion here is just going out of bounds. Like I said earlier, either get on board and help out, or sit on the sidelines and watch, but don't get in the way and resist how it functions or demand it work like it used to. The way it used to work was difficult, clunky, inefficient and demanding that we hobble a racing car to run like a horse cart serves no-one.



dunniteowl

[Shallina]

It's a super mistake to make use of something that will be changing and won't work anymore.

When I do something, it's done, I don't go back on it. I got so many thing to do, that I can afford to change things for nothing.

Anyway since the hak are always elvoving, you always download a new one. In the end you download as much or even more than with a versionning system.

If NVDIA worked this way, we would not have been able to play NWN2 for 6 month while their driver weren't working for NWN2....

What a good system.....

It's a good idea, but the way it's done is bad, it need to be more serious than that to be adopted by everyone and functional.

The goal isn't to produce cool idea but things that works. This way of doing thing have been proved to be bad, that why everyone moved to "versioning".

If software stayed without versoning, you wouldn't have been able to play for 6 month with the NVDIA drive rproblem.

If pain is unable to work on something for 4 weeks you are stuck with your bug for 4 week with this way of working.

There is a difference beetween making a little things for yourself, and making a standard that can be adopted by everyone.

In its current state, this system is only for Pain and his IRC friend, and can only work with a very restricted circle of poeple.

Modifié par Shallina, 29 octobre 2010 - 02:39 .

[painofdungeoneternal]

Shallina wrote...

It's a super mistake to make use of something that will be changing and won't work anymore.

When I do something, it's done, I don't go back on it. I got so many thing to do, that I can afford to change things for nothing.

Anyway since the hak are always elvoving, you always download a new one. In the end you download as much or even more than with a versionning system.

If NVDIA worked this way, we would not have been able to play NWN2 for 6 month while their driver weren't working for NWN2....

What a good system.....

It's a good idea, but the way it's done is bad, it need to be more serious than that to be adopted by everyone and functional.

The goal isn't to produce cool idea but things that works. This way of doing thing have been proved to be bad, that why everyone moved to "versioning".

If software stayed without versoning, you wouldn't have been able to play for 6 month with the NVDIA drive rproblem.

If pain is unable to work on something for 4 weeks you are stuck with your bug for 4 week with this way of working.

There is a difference beetween making a little things for yourself, and making a standard that can be adopted by everyone.

In its current state, this system is only for Pain and his IRC friend, and can only work with a very restricted circle of poeple.

All that just leaves me confused.

Shalina, before you go making assumptions, you might go talk to the folks on IRC, learn who the folks are behind Sea of Dragons, and understand this is something that works better in practice. It is not for myself, it's a standard which has a lot of major players already on board.

Again i think there is a bit of a language barrier, but your comments seem to aim more at the messenger than the message.  I don't think your describing those on IRC the way you did is fair, especially since you have no idea who you are talking about.

Modifié par painofdungeoneternal, 29 octobre 2010 - 03:09 .

[kamalpoe]

Shallina wrote...

It's a super mistake to make use of something that will be changing and won't work anymore..

This has already been explained by Pain. It's tested by PW's. If there are no apparent bugs it goes "live". At this point virtually all content is live having been tested privately first, and currently having been in actual use for some time. The ADL idea may be new to you, but it is not new.

Shallina wrote...
If pain is unable to work on something for 4 weeks you are stuck with your bug for 4 week with this way of working..

I suggest reading what I've already written on this very page. Pain is not necessary.

Shallina wrote...There is a difference beetween making a little things for yourself, and making a standard that can be adopted by everyone.

ADL is a standard everyone can use. It's happily explained it to anyone willing to listen.

Shallina wrote...
It's a good idea, but the way it's done is bad, it need to be more serious than that to be adopted by everyone and functional.
....
In its current state, this system is only for Pain and his IRC friend, and can only work with a very restricted circle of poeple.

Honestly, if you're a builder or PW admin and you're not on the IRC channel you're missing out. It's no secret clique, instructions for joining in are stickied thread here in the General Discussion forums. There's a reason why most PW's have people there. From a general builder and PW development perspective, it's where all the action is and where the most exciting content is being built and looking for feedback. If you're not there, you're going to be rebuilding the wheel trying to do things that people there have figured out.

There's really no point in further discussion. If you don't like ADL, don't use it, build your own standard. ADL is a standard. It works great. It does just what it claims to do.

[Shallina]

you are a little circle....

But with this way of working we can't expand this system to all NWN2 module and PW.

And if we can't expand it to all NWN2 module and PW, then the choosen standard isn't good enought.

No Kamal without versionning ADL isn't a standard that anyone can use. And that's where the problem lie.

You change something in your hak, everyone need to adapt the use of the HAK.

And the modules that were fine and made use of it but with no one to maintain them, don't work anymore.

Modifié par Shallina, 29 octobre 2010 - 03:11 .

[painofdungeoneternal]

Shallina wrote...

you are a little circle....

But with this way of working we can't expand this system to all NWN2 module and PW.

And if we can't expand it to all NWN2 module and PW, then the choosen standard isn't good enought.

Um, according to PW admins who understand it we can.

[kamalpoe]

Shallina wrote...

you are a little circle....

But with this way of working we can't expand this system to all NWN2 module and PW.

And if we can't expand it to all NWN2 module and PW, then the choosen standard isn't good enought.

No Kamal without versionning ADL isn't a standard that anyone can use. And that's where the problem lie.

You change something in your hak, everyone need to adapt the use of the HAK.

And the modules that were fine and made use of it but with no one to maintain them, don't work anymore.

With versioning ADL is a repeat of the problems Olblach spoke of on page 1, eg multiple downloads of identical content. It's a repeat of Cep, Cep2.0, Cep2.1 etc. It's already been explained why this is bad in practice.

All the objections raised have already been answered by actual practice with the PW's involved.

[Shallina]

you still download a new hak each time you make it elvove....

Wich mean, with your solution you aren"t in a better shape.

It's even worse, since the hak is erased for the PW that didn't get the new one with the old one.

And downloaded again when you connect to a PW that got the new version.

With versioning, you are sure to download 1 version only one time.

Actually the system works beceause it's a little circle. Make the circle of user a little bigger and it will crumble.

Modifié par Shallina, 29 octobre 2010 - 03:22 .

[EvilShade]

Well just to say something very short.

We (my team and I) are on the hak idea thing and it makes sense to us. We are currently revamping our PW / Website, but we will return to live in a few months. Not sure who you're talking about when saying "you are a little circle...." but what do I know.

[kamalpoe]

Shallina wrote...
It's even worse, since the hak is erased for the PW that didn't get the new one with the old one.

Haks aren't introduced without the agreement of the PW's involved, so there is no "missing the Hak". This is something that's already been explained. Please go back though this thread and see the answers to your questions. Each point you raise has already been answered.

If you think the system will fall apart, do not use it. It's that simple.

[dunniteowl]

Shallina, I can honestly say you have no idea what you're saying relative to the discussion at hand. It may be the language issue (I know you're a native French speaker) but it appears to me that you're crying WOLF when you're not even a shepherd. I think you're best bet would be to travel to IRC and visit this 'little circle' you seem so disdainful of and actually talk TO people instead of AT them.

In other words, you have to be willing to hear the information and not be so dismissive of it. How can you possibly dismiss something you so clearly do not understand? It's been explained. Nothing is "constantly evolving," as you put it. Nothing is being revisioned.

Now pay attention this time:

A hak gets put together and tested privately to see what the major issues/flaws are. Then when it looks okay, it gets placed out for Beta with others willing to test it. Then it's tested for a short while (I don't know what a typical timeframe is) and whatever fixes are required get placed into the hak and retested.

In all that time this hak is listed as Beta/Trial version. Once testing shows it to be solid, it gets "locked" and no further changes are made to it. In all that time the name does not change. Once it's feature locked, it's available for general distribution. And it doesn't get or need to be changed ANY MORE. Foreseeably at least.

If something comes along, like a new texturing breakthrough, or a new animation rigging technique, sure, someone might decide it's worthwhile to go back and completely redo the hak, but if they did, once it was done, the name can be replaced and the communication goes out that this is a new Hak. In that case, while it would replace the old hak, there would have to be a new name associated with it just to let people know it's completely redone.

And, in that case, how would that be any different than versioning?

For the most part, additional materials are going to have to be made into their own, individualized unique haks. And this could work as a sort of versioning as well if you like to call it that.

An example would be, say, someone made a clothing hak with 200 items of clothing, hats, robes, boots, shirts, you name it. A year later, the same person makes another 120 clothing items.

Instead of making another hak adding all the old stuff to all the new, you just make a new hak and call it the same thing with a 2 added to the name.

That way, folks who don't think they need it can opt to not require it in their mods. Folks who add it in, don't need to remove a hak and replace it, they just add the new hak. Players who have already downloaded it in whatever way (either off another PW, an SP module using the Autodownloader or off the Vault) already have it on their system and if it's required, they don't have to download it again, because they already have it.

In this case, you don't NEED versioning, because versioning is non existant in the technical sense of what versioning is.

That's how it works. It's that simple. And if you don't believe it and you haven't tested it, then you don't know what you're saying. And that's what it sounds like. It sounds like you're objecting to things on principle, which is based entirely on not understanding what the process really is.

I said it before, if you don't like it, don't use it. If you don't understand it, instead of ridicule and insult, try it out for your self and test it, work with it and then come back with some productive things to say.

Personally, when I logged into Dex2 and played there during the NWNCon6 Doom and Gloom event, I thought, from a player's perspective, it worked splendidly. I just logged in, waited for some critical files and then started creating my character while the other files were loading. And once I got in the game and played, I had a blast.

From a Player's Perspective, I think that "Little Circle" has the chops to do what you say is wrong -- and they're doing it right, because I had a great time and the download aspect was so painless that I think pain should change his name.

So. Like I said before, either get on board and help out, or just don't use it. But don't sit here and complain about things that aren't really part of the issue in the first place and don't use insult and riducule to be more right. It's not working and it's not cool. It's only creating confusion where none should be.



dunniteowl

[Shallina]

"Haks aren't introduced without the agreement of the PW's involved"

And that's why it can't work outside a little circle. And why software elvoved to versioning.

You really don't understand the constraint that lie behind this little sentence: Haks aren't introduced without the agreement of the PW's involved

This constraint is the whole problem.

One actor is missing ? everything crumble.

I have perfectly understood what they are doing. They are doing the errors that were done before versionning got introduced.

Modifié par Shallina, 29 octobre 2010 - 04:14 .

[Shallina]

Dunnitownl I can say you never made something serious with software devellopement.

I perfectly understood what they are doing. And what they are doing isn't a standard.

"Haks aren't introduced without the agreement of the PW's involved"

All the problem is here.

I release a module ADL compilant, move on into something else, and you can nevers do anithing without breaking my work, since I won't work on it anymore. And poeple that wanted to play it will be in trouble if change are introduced.

Modifié par Shallina, 29 octobre 2010 - 04:10 .

[Olblach]

They are obssessed by "not 2 identical files in the adl hak suite" that's why they do like this. Even though All-In-One have advantages but it's evil fior them.



As PW admin my problem is identical hak on my server and on the player harddisk.



Since we have different goals we cannot work together.

[Shallina]

All in one is indeed evil.

And their idea is good. It's just that they didn't understood that they need to put versionning in their ADL system if they want it to be a standard.

And they didn't realise, each time they make a hak elvove, poeple have to download it again even if it has the same name.

All in one is very very very evil. Wanna make elvove a little something ? download it all again.

The ADL concept is 10 time superiors, but the current implementation is really crappy.

Modifié par Shallina, 29 octobre 2010 - 04:19 .

[Olblach]

All In one is not evil if you know what you are doing. However it's another story.



I'm sure if they find a duplicate they remove it from one of the haks because one file cannot be shared by two haks. This explains why they modify the haks.

[Shallina]

Yeah and the module which only used the hak where the thing got removed is screwed.

[painofdungeoneternal]

Shalina and Olbach, I know you agree with each other, the question i have is after i implement this will it show the issues you keep fretting about. You seem to ignore the fact that i can look at facts about how it works instead of just speculation on how it might work. Note that this is in active use by 2 PW's, is partially in use by many more, and i know of 4 PWs in development which are going to be using it. The ones not using it do agree with it, they just can't redo everything to use it which is part of why i am designing it for partial use.

It's hard to have a discussion when people cannot agree on facts, and the thing i have found is that most of those who have launched a PW or two and have run it for a while tend to find a lot of common ground in knowing what works or does not work. Nothing like actually implementing things to find out if an idea is good or not.

All this talk is cheap so either do something or wait until those of us doing the work can show how it works one way or the other.

The real issue here is that PW's who do not communicate are a problem, those who just think they are the center of everything and can disregard everything else are a problem. And my solution of working with other members of the community is solving far more problems than your renaming all the 4+ gigs of social suite to make sure it's downloaded only once they download it twice. I mean that just sounds nutty. Please if you want to rename things which players already have, please DON'T touch any of the ADL standard haks and just do your own thing.

The problems solved by versioning are minor and I am not seeing them in my PW or those using what i am advocating, the problems caused by versioning are things which send PW admins to IRC for help because they cannot get the updates to work and their PWs are dead until they get it fixed. Remember the devil is in the details and i don't think you are aware of many of those details. Me i want to have a way of doing things that makes it easier on PW admins instead of harder, and at the same time i want to make players only have one version of a give set of content on their hard drive whenever i can.

Modifié par painofdungeoneternal, 29 octobre 2010 - 05:16 .

[Shallina]

No Pain, the problem with that system is that you think you are the center of everything. And I don't agree with Olblach that wish for a CEP.

The ADL system could really be better, but you need to be a little more serious with it if you want it to be a standard.

You can look into problem but for how long and how often ?

IF a 100 of module adopt your system, Are you going to review each of them each time you change something ?

The way you are doing it can only work with a little circle. And that's the reason why it can't becommes a standard for everyone.

It's not beceause someone don't agree with you that he side with the other, I for myself side with gamer and module and PW makers.

And as a gamer and module maker and Dev IRL I see some fundamuntal flaws in your system. And this is a problem if you want that system to be normalised for everyone.

Modifié par Shallina, 29 octobre 2010 - 05:29 .

[painofdungeoneternal]

I am not the center. Nor do i approve.



I am discussing it with other PW admins, there IS NO center. This is all based on discussion and finding common ground.



What i said is a competant QA person, which is not some idiot but someone who knows how to QA things should approve them. If you notice they are on Hellfires vault pages, Nytir did not want to post them on his so i just did the work for him ( he quit by then ).



You have NO clue about how i am doing it, but then you are not one of the folks i need to get on board.

[Shallina]

I know that when I use something, If I want it to always work, other can't go behind and change it.



That's why versioning got invented and everyone a litle serious about devellopement use it.

[kamalpoe]

Shallina wrote...

I know that when I use something, If I want it to always work, other can't go behind and change it.

What's this "going behind" stuff? There is no "going behind". That was answered pages ago.

[kamalpoe]

With ADL, the 2da's are controlled by the PW, not the ADL. ADL haks do not include 2das. That's entirely up to the PW or SP module maker.