Compatibility of Mods - Running List #1615
Comments
|
I agree with the labels/suggestions so far. I poked regex because he still wants to use AIES, so if he turns up any community fixes/patches hopefully he will share it here. |
|
SovietEnginePack? https://github.com/Olympic1/SovietEnginePack |
|
Sad. I'm a fan of many of the packs that just aren't supported anymore, like AIES and 6s (though I prefer Universal Storage personally) |
|
@pap1723 , could you link to the list you're drawing from in your OP? I'm assuming the list found here? http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/index.php?/topic/155700-113-stable-122-dev-realism-overhaul-v1132-august-31/ |
|
@stratochief66 I just updated again. Here has been my process...I am going through the RO_SuggestedMods folder one by one and am pulling out all of the parts into a spreadsheet to get the part name, title and description. I am going to use this to build a master database of all of the parts that are supported by RO and RP-0 and will base all of the tech tree information and other stuff on that going forward. So there is no real list. Just doing it all by hand. |
|
OK, I have fully updated it with the first 32 mods I have gone through. |
|
It looks like RealEnginePack should eventually deprecate SovietEnginePack, but there seems to be a gap or two, and the SovietEnginePack was used in NK's RP0 playthrough series last year |
|
@pap1723 please remove all the suggestions for KK launchers related mods. These mods are neither deprecated or requiring ANY changes. I have early pre-release of ULA pack and I have been removing support for his old rockets(which you can't download anymore anyway) and making configs for the ULA pack. The reason you can't find it is because it's not released yet, but I did the configs ahead of time so it would already be supported when it releases. The old configs were removed or replaced as some of the ULA parts names conflict with the old mod. Considering nobody has the ULA pack but me I don't want anyone making any changes to any of these configs since they would have no idea what they are doing. Please remove them from this list. |
|
@raidernick he is free to make his own suggestion or list his own impression of any mod, as anyone would be. You're free to provide him (and anyone) with new information or context he didn't find on his own. Naturally, any other opinions will be considered before any mod is removed from RO. @raidernick on the example of the KK Launchers Atlas, will not no longer require Oldschool Fairings moving forward, or do you know that Oldschool Fairings will be updated or has been updated? @pap1723 , your link for KK Launchers Atlas goes to the SpaceX forum page. Also, support for the K2 pod was only recently added. The thinking is that it is a nice, light addition of a 2 person pod, for people who don't want FASA or another mod that includes tons of other content, plus a 2 person part. |
|
OSF is not included on the RO configs, I think pap is confused here. KK made OSF config an optional dependency of the mod it's not installed by default. The RO configs do not use OSF and get around it by including a regular decoupler and an invisible thrust transform to separate fairings. OSF is not or will ever be required for use in RO. |
|
@raidernick that makes sense about the KK Launchers mods, I didn't know where those came from as I had never seen them on the forums and could not find any information on them. I have updated the above. It was my mistake about the OSF configs being required. I thought that is what I had read through on the forums, but must have misunderstood. @stratochief66 the K2 Command Pod was a typo writing that it should not be supported going forward. Basically, my thought process is this...if the mod is being updated for the current version, the support should continue. I also do not think we should REMOVE support of many mods, only a couple that are multiple KSP versions behind and look to never be updated. For all the rest of them, I just think we should move them into a folder that keeps the support that is there for them, but anyone looking to help and update and modify, doesn't look in those folders to work on those mods. I have updated the above to reflect the information shared. |
|
@pap1723 There are some deprecated mods from that list that i use personally and support them as best as i can (bug fixing the part modules wherever possible):
Because a part mod has not been officially released it does not mean that you should write them off. Example: if AIES is removed then you lose a lot of nice (and sometimes unique) parts, not available via other mods. |
|
Originally DECQ stole the R7 models from me and tried to release them as his own. This I had shut down by moderators and I took his textures and merged them into my mod. Since then he has taken models from buran.ru and put them into the game. That is the r7 he currently has available, it is confusing at first based on his forum history but he does have his own r7 out there that is maintained(sort of). @PhineasFreak the only problem I see is that DECQ likes to release his own RO configs with his mods because he has something against adding them to the repo. These will conflict with the configs we have on here, I'm not sure why people are adding them here since DECQ does his own, obviously doesn't want them on here and his will conflict with these. If he wants to manage them himself having duplicates here can only cause problems. |
|
Alright, so I don't know the best thing to do with this going forward. My initial intent was to basically list all the mods with RO configs and to determine the best course of action going forward. There are a ton of mods with configs for RO and many of them are from a time when RO was first created. I know that many of these are PARTS only mods, and will "work" with the current version of KSP. However, I also know that everyone does not have infinite time to make sure all of these are working correctly and to fix any issues that come up. For almost all of the really old parts mods, there are new alternatives that are actively being updated. I will probably not continue going through the list of mods to determine what support they should have going forward. If someone wants to use an older mod, there is nothing that should stop them from doing so. It was my goal to try and cost and place as many parts as possible for RP-0 and will still continue to do that, but I will focus on the mods that are the most often used and still maintained. There won't be anymore talk of moving mods into Deprecated folders in case some players want to continue to use them moving forward. |
|
@raidernick When i first made the RO configs for the Angara, the R7 and the Soyuz i contacted him and said that it is OK. I am not aware if he continues to distribute RO configs with these mod though. If there are conflicts then yes, i agree, we should remove them. @pap1723 I think it is OK to create a "DEPRECATED" folder (like the REWORK one) and move these mods there. This way a user that continues to use these mods will not be left without an option while the RO team can focus on mods that are in active development. Basic bug fixing could be left upon the interested user or a contributor that can spare some time here and there. I'd suggest to continue documenting the supported mods, old and new, and then mark them temporarily as either "Active" or "Deprecated". Their final "fate" could be decided by all the contributing members here. Please reconsider it. |
|
@pap1723 I agree there was definitely value in you searching for all the mods we have configs for, and noting your impressions of their status. If you want to continue doing that, please do is. As PhineasFreak said, there is no downside to users if we/you create a DEPRECATED folder and move configs into it, and it will be of use to us and new contributors moving forward to have things organized like that. |
|
@pap1723 I also feel like that i should apologize if i sounded a bit harsh earlier. I missed the actual point of this issue and thought that you were going to eternally "retire" good and/or working mods... 😶 |
|
@PhineasFreak I appreciate that. I may have thought that there was no point to what I was doing based on your comment, but it has actually helped to clarify what my intents and purposes are! So no harm done and I can continue on. I am going to change this over to a table format. I will put the name of the mod and then can add the rest of the information so it is easy to see at a glance. So it'll look like the below...
|
|
@pap1723 Before i forget: we can move the "RO_SXT_Fuselage" config to the actual SXT folder, as these parts are included with the latest SXT versions. The Romfarer parts can also be safely be tagged as deprecated. There has not been an update for ages and replacements exist from many other working/updated mods. |
|
@PhineasFreak from what I can see, none of the Romfarer mods are even able to be found on the forums, is that correct? |
|
I found the one for the Lazor parts (last updated at December 17, 2014) but no mention about the Buran & ISS manipulators (they are not parts of the Lazor mod). |
|
They must have been lost in the KSP Forums erasure. |
|
@pap1723 I will be also posting here mods that are no longer supported and/or have updated replacements:
BTW, don't forget to also move any RealPlume configs associated with these mods. |
|
@PhineasFreak we take an RL10B-2 model from SSTU for use as a vinci, and both RLA and AIES have an RL60/Vinci, but yeah there's no dedicated model. |
|
@pap1723 Here is the forum link to the KK ATK pack: http://forum.kerbalspaceprogram.com/index.php?/topic/115288-113-atk-propulsion-pack-srbs-for-everyone-v3/ (if you want to insert the link to the list). |
|
maintained in this google doc now: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1A7gQkIiQKi0VtRecE6p86KCKuoawZPdzk7NlaxssRJ4/edit#gid=0 This can be reopened in the future if needed but as of now is outdated, some of the links are no longer working/relevant. |
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: