Skip to content
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

Suggestion: Make the client prioritise carpet rules available on the client over database #88

Closed
ghost opened this issue Jan 8, 2023 · 3 comments
Labels
enhancement New feature or request

Comments

@ghost
Copy link

ghost commented Jan 8, 2023

Carpet rule allowSpawningOfflinePlayers giving out error when being edited from essential client carpet menu
image

Apparently, carpet dosen't have this option while essential client shows it.
image
image

Isn't it possible to get the possible values from carpet instead of it being hard coded? (in case it is)

@senseiwells
Copy link
Owner

The reason this happens is because the data for the rules is pulled from the carpet database. This scans all carpet extensions for their rules and their available options.
If you are running an older version of carpet mod the options may have changed since then and thus the most updated options won't work.
It isn't possible to get the data from carpet, unless you also have carpet installed (and are in singleplayer). I suppose I could implement is so if you have a matching carpet rule from a mod installed it displays correctly...?
But for rules that are not present on the client the only source of data for that rule is from the database so it's not possible to fix this.

@senseiwells senseiwells changed the title Issue: non supported option for carpet rule Suggestion: Make the client prioritise carpet rules available on the client over database Jan 9, 2023
@senseiwells senseiwells added the enhancement New feature or request label Jan 9, 2023
@ghost
Copy link
Author

ghost commented Jan 11, 2023

wait but i have the latest carpet version for 1.19.3

@senseiwells
Copy link
Owner

Oops, that's my mistake, this was actually an issue with the database (see here). This has now been fixed, so when the database next updates this should be fixed.

However I will leave this issue open as what I previously stated is still valid.

senseiwells added a commit that referenced this issue Jan 16, 2023
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
enhancement New feature or request
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

1 participant