I've run into this problem as well.
I'll try the "re-install everything and delete the wtf files" approach and see how that goes.
Could it be as simple as that really?
- Registered User
Member for 11 years, 5 months, and 9 days
Last active Fri, Oct, 4 2013 14:32:03
- 0 Followers
- 190 Total Posts
- 0 Thanks
Mar 27, 2008who is going to eat my crackers now that parrot is gone? :(Posted in: General AddOns
ckk i wish you the best of luck with your new job. i want you to know that i have really enjoyed your work over the years and appreciate everything you have done for the wow addon community.
Jan 29, 2008Anyone else having issues with item links getting stuck on the upper part of the screen? Can try to move them but that go straight back to the upper screen. Like it's glued there and attached to a rubber band or something.Posted in: General AddOns
Oct 5, 2007Is it really common place to create a completely new folder for every major revision of an addon?Posted in: FuBar AddOns
A quick look at files.wowace.com seems to indicated that it's not a very common practice at all.
Some addons that went from Ace1 to Ace2 created a new AddonName2 folder but most of the major addons did not. BigWigs? Went from Ace1 to Ace2 but didn't change the folder name. SCT? Went from a non-Ace addon to an Ace addon but didn't change the folder name.
Most of the addons from repository sites like wowinterface.com also go through big revisions but do not change their folder names. Look at Clique, PerfectRaid, Bagnon, Ludwig, etc. These are major addons that have always used the same folder and I would say rightly so.
This could be fixed by rebranding the fork of FuBar as something else. Instead of FuBar, call it FuOld or something. Then it won't be branded as Ace and it won't mislead users to think it's a new version of their beloved FuBar addon. And the people who say they did this only for themselves and people who wanted it can proceed without interfering with the development of major addons anymore.
Oct 5, 2007Fair enough.Posted in: Map/Minimap AddOns
Wobin I may have taken what you said out of context and I apologize for that. I have been frustrated by all of the he-said, she-said tic-for-tac arguments lately which is no excuse for singling you out so I hope you can accept my apology.
There has been alot of opinions stately lately which have been used as justification for an actions taken. There very well may be a prevailing opinion that Ckk only writes for himself and noone else which may be based in part on him forking Ace2 into Rock, but there is a great deal of evidence to the contrary. That's what makes it so tough to read about some of the stuff going on around here. Many authors in this community have done many great things for users everywhere. It's natural for there to be difference of opinion and for people to go in different directions. Sure it's a bit chaotic right now but it seems like there are solutions planned that will allow all visions of the base framework to be supported by the many great libraries developed by this community. Hopefully things can hold together long enough for everything to fall in place.
Oct 4, 2007Mikk that's two jabs you have made against Ckk that I have seen today. Ckk didn't make Rock just for him. He may have had a base disagreement on how to evolve the Ace2 framework but given the amount of time he no doubt invested in Ace2, can you blame him for not agreeing that it all had to be scraped in order to achieve some sort of nirvana state of ultra efficiency. Continuously making jabs while actively moderating forums for drama is silly. What is the purpose of constantly fanning those flames?Posted in: FuBar AddOns
You make a good point about major addon support for fubar-2.0 and it really would be silly if something in FuBar-3.0 broke those. Ckk seems to be a pretty smart guy so he probably realizes this. Those other major addons shouldn't ever have to be "rocked" if those authors dont want to. Then again hey maybe someone will port those major addons to Rock right in the trunk too! That would solve the duplicate libraries issues for you. Or maybe we'll get to that state of framework agnostic libraries afterall and noone will be impacted by duplicate non-framework libs.
Oct 4, 2007lapalapa I am sorry for coming off like I have an attitude. That was not my intent.Posted in: FuBar AddOns
I used the word "IF" for a reason. I am trying to be rational about this. Is it reasonable to fork a framework addon and expect all its plugins to be forever backward compatible? I'm not saying that this is going to happen for all FuBar-2.0 plugins but it might happen to some. Realistically would I be surprised *if* fuBar-3.0 was not backward compatible with fuBar-2.0? No. Would I be surprised *if* there were new features in the fuBar-3.0 library that are not in fuBar-2.0 that authors want to use in future plugins? No. Would I be surprised *if* authors chose to stay current with the official FuBar release at the expense of FuBar2 and FuBarAce users? No. Forking the FuBar framework shouldn't limit Ckk's choice to move the FuBar framework forward.
It seems like it stands to reason that by choosing to create a non-sanctioned fork of FuBar you are choosing to maintain forward compatibility with the official FuBar framework aren't you? How would it be FuBar3's fault if new features don't work in FuBar2 or FuBarAce? It seems like what you want to do is create a snapshot in time where all things FuBar2 are frozen and unchanged. You can get this by tagging the old addons or downloading them from wowinterface.com can't you? Isn't that the choice you are wanting? It just won't be available with WAU that pulls directly from the trunk. Maybe you could add a feature to WAU to allow users to pull from branches or tags? The bottom line is that noone was forcing you to change in the first place. Once you saw that FuBar3 hit the trunk you could have easily gone back to FuBar2 and did that thing that protected your folder from bring detected by WAU. Since you dont like it, don't upgrade. But by forking it, you should inherit the baggage of that choice. Ckk shouldn't be shackled by someone refusing to move forward with him.
Oct 4, 2007I don't think anyone is arguing that Ace2 does not have shortcomings that can be improved.Posted in: Map/Minimap AddOns
The thing that made Ace2 a best-in-class framework for developing addons is all the libraries. It's like console gaming systems.. the best ones are the ones that have the best games even if it doesn't have the most horsepower. Ace2 was a great achievement for this community even if mistakes were made in the framework and/or libraries that people now regret. Once the libaries in this community are made framework agnostic, it will allow Rock/Ace3/Dongle/whatever to stand on equal footing and let authors choose which works best for what they are trying to do.
People treating beta addons obtained from WAU as sacred released addons is the problem but an author choosing to change the framework they use for their addons is not. I have said this to Mikk in a private message but I will say it publically.. the anti-drama policy that covers the forums and wiki should be extended to the svn. Purposefully impeding the development of addons by forking them and branding them as Ace is inciteful and should be moderated. It's worse than people arguing Rock vs. Ace3 or defacing a wiki page because stuff on the svn gets directly into the distribution channel that is WAU. Instead of spawning drama filled threads, they create confusion in the user base and fuel the very issues that created the Ace backlash that many devs in this community are upset about.
I know I have been on a soapbox about this. I don't apologize for being concerned and vocal. Hope that it is clear that I am trying to constructively discuss my concerns and that I am not trying to stir a drama shitstorm. It's not constructive for Admins who are working under the banner of trying to minimize drama to make veiled jabs. There is also alot of misinformation being spread and by people who I have a great deal of respect for. As an example, Wobin has said Ckk only writes for himself which is denied by Ckk and not supported by evidence given the amount of documentation he has created to support other authors writing addons.
Oct 4, 2007Ckk deprecated fuBar-1.0 when he released fuBar-2.0. It is no surprise if he deprecated fuBar-2.0 with the release of the fuBar-3.0 library. Ckk is not obligated to maintain backwards compatibility with FuBar-2.0 with his FuBar-3.0 library at all. It's his addon. He is steering the addon in a direction of his choosing. Expecting him to forever provide support for your unsanction fork seems pretty illogical to me. Authors choosing to keep their modules current with the current version of FuBar may force all you FuBar-2.0 hangerson to create your own or create more ace forks. This is the risk and probable folly of forking an actively developed addon.Posted in: FuBar AddOns
Oct 3, 2007Let's not allow FuBar to get to the state that TitanPanel got where it lost its creative vision as more and more people forked it after it was abondoned by its owner. FuBar is not an abandoned addon. CKK is actively evolving the addon no different than Grayhoof has evolved SCT. Hiding behind GPL to steal creative control from the owner is rediculous.Posted in: FuBar AddOns
Sure it doesn't seem like a big deal right now but think this through. Play this forward in your head. When will it stop? Will it stop when people start "rocking" popular Ace2 addons like BigWigs and puts it in the svn as BigWigsRock? All in the name of avoiding duplication of Libs since they like Rock better than Ace? Or do we end this madness now and work towards the framework agnostic libraries that many of the Ace3 authors have discussed?
There is nothing to attack here.
This is not blown out of proportion.
I wouldn't even lobby for this cause if I didn't care about this community and the addons produced by it. I certainly gain nothing from this. But I am hoping to be a voice of reason on something that strikes me as a very bad precident.
Oct 3, 2007Nice insult. No, I am very busy however I care so I express my concern. If you were not around back in the days when everyone wanted to make their AceFisher, AceBar, AceUnitFrames, AceInspector, etc. then you have no idea what I am talking about. But those who have been around know. And how ironic it will be for the administrators who fought hard for people to stop using the word Ace in their addon folders to turn a blind eye now.Posted in: FuBar AddOns
Oct 3, 2007You may be right. The golden age of Ace seems like it is now just a dream.Posted in: Map/Minimap AddOns
Hopefully some fences can be mended and it will actually happen. Seems like the only way to realize the vision of "it doesn't matter what framework" is to get to agnostic libraries. Until then it's like we're all standing on top of a fault line just waiting for the "big one" that will cause some of us to fall into the abyss.
Oct 3, 2007Of course. I knew there was going to be an excuse.Posted in: FuBar AddOns
That's fine. Then at least rename it to take out the word Ace. Call it PeanutButter for all I care. But please don't intentionally make an Ace branded FuBar. If your intention is purely to preserve FuBar2 then handle your business that way instead. Please.
- To post a comment, please login or register a new account.