-
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 321
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Deco block #3511
Deco block #3511
Conversation
@@ -239,6 +240,7 @@ public static AbstractBuilding create(final Colony colony, @NotNull final TileEn | |||
|
|||
if (building != null && parent.getWorld() != null && !(building instanceof PostBox)) | |||
{ | |||
building.setRotation(BlockUtils.getRotationFromFacing(parent.getWorld().getBlockState(parent.getPosition()).getValue(AbstractBlockHut.FACING))); |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
This here is the default rotation, for when placed by hand, the real rotation is set later then, if existent
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Looks good for me, I just have some questions and notes:
- why does the window have no view?
- maybe some background image for the gui
- can you do schematics in standalone prs (as you were doing before)?
/** | ||
* If the player opening the GUI is an admin. | ||
*/ | ||
private boolean admin = Minecraft.getMinecraft().player.isCreative(); |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
maybe a better variable name?
since admin does not equal to creative imho
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
true
why does the window have no view?
|
Closes #332
Closes #3508
Closes #3507
Changes proposed in this pull request:
Review please