• 0

    posted a message on Cartoace ?!?!
    Ammo it is disappointing that you make such broad generalizations about the people in this community to justify your actions. The "people who understand the code" need to learn about the human element. Branding the folder with the word Ace and then hiding behind "we know the code" doesn't make it right. Don't brand it. It's been said for a long time. It's a bad idea and needs to be avoided and actively moderated because of the problems it causes. I'm not complaining just to complain. There are plenty of addons that have had major revisions without changing their folder name. It doesn't matter if the framework changes. Yes there is some overhead. This is a transitional time. This could have been avoided, but because people couldn't work together we're here now. So rather than further tear the community apart by branding folders with Ace let's take the high road and stick with the wise councel of folks like Tekkub. It doesn't matter what the framework and libraries are. Some duplication is exceptable while things in the beta world of wowace.com transition to framework agnostic libraries.
    Posted in: Map/Minimap AddOns
  • 0

    posted a message on Cartoace ?!?!
    Quote from Gunahylia »

    Technically speaking this should probably have been Cartographer-1.0; same thing with FuBarAce which should've been FuBar-2.0 (Though that's confusing with the Rock version being called FuBar while being FuBar-3.0).

    Same would count for Pitbull and Parrot if anyone decides to do so.


    /signed

    If you're stuck on the idea that if it's not Ace'd then it's crap.. at least stick with your own standards. Don't brand your addon names with the word ACE. Such a simple and wise practice that has done the community well for a very long time.
    Posted in: Map/Minimap AddOns
  • 0

    posted a message on FuBarAce?
    Mikk, Ammo.. do the right thing and rename that folder please. Don't play the "it's too late" card because frankly it isn't. Also you don't have to use the alpha/beta Rock version of FuBar just go download the stable and well tested Ace version from wowinterface.com already if that is what you are concerned about. I see no rational justification for forking FuBar on the trunk. You had other options for getting what you wanted. You also could have just Tagged the last FuBar version that used Ace as FuBar2.
    Posted in: FuBar AddOns
  • 0

    posted a message on FuBarAce?
    i understand that it's released under GPL. that isn't my issue.

    more specifically, the right to do something doesn't make doing it right.

    i am not necessarily against having an strictly ace version of fubar however doing these forks is perpetuating the very thing that many of the folks who are working on ace3 have said.. it should not matter to you as a user what framework or libraries an addon uses. ckk's fubar doesn't list as "FuBar -Rock-". He took off the branding. Then you put that screwed up branding which has created many problems and put it right back in there. my point of starting this thread was to voice a concern which does not get invalidated by GPL. Many devs in this community have been trying to steer users in this community to the understanding that a well written addon is all they should be concerned about. To see other devs in this community undercut them like this seems just tragic. At the very least you should immediately remove the "Ace" branding from your projects folder name. That's been an established standard for over a year now.
    Posted in: FuBar AddOns
  • 0

    posted a message on FuBarAce?
    given the people involved i doubt anything will change. still doesn't make it right.
    Posted in: FuBar AddOns
  • 0

    posted a message on FuBarAce?
    Quote from lapalapa »

    i really cant see what makes you (or anyone else) obligated to use it.

    for me it is how it should be done from very start - separate Ace2 version and separate Rock version

    btw it is fully supported.


    wow. just wow.

    it's not about if i am obligated to use it, it's about if its right for someone other than ckk to fork his addons. if ckk did it then that's fine. however if he didnt it doesnt seem right. whether you agree with rock or not does not matter. the framework that fubar uses does not matter. if you arent happy with a beta version of an addon that doesnt give anyone the right to try and steal control of the project.

    Quote from OrionShock »

    unless the original author of FuBar puts them out it shouldn't even have been done. It deprives him of controlling his own work, witch is his right. And no last time i checked ck had little to nothing to do with the ace version any more as the trunk version has moved on.


    this is what i am talking about.

    Posted in: FuBar AddOns
  • 0

    posted a message on FuBarAce?
    Is this really going to be a supported fork of this addon?

    If yes, why have 2 versions?
    If no, why allow people to create an unsupported fork?

    It seems like a bad idea that will lead to even more user confusion/frustration in my opinion.

    There can be only one!
    Posted in: FuBar AddOns
  • 0

    posted a message on Having several frameworks running at the same time
    Add-on incompatibilities have been a problem so that's not a revelation. Some add-ons just don't like others and users have learned to live with this in order to use their favorite add-ons. I guess the question to ask is whether it's worthwhile to at least take steps to assure that frameworks of this community do not create a "dll hell" (read: poor app interaction) type situation as Sylvanaar referred to.

    Tangent:
    For those who aren't sure what that means, it refers to a situation where different apps ship with different versions of the same libraries and depending on which application launched first it set the version of that library that any other application using that library would use. The first version loaded into memory was the one used by all. This resulted in odd issues that were hard to troubleshoot like intermittent errors that only happened when certain apps where loaded in certain order. It's also one of the reasons Microsoft's #1 support answer is to restart Windows. In Windows 2000, Microsoft introduced DLL redirection where you could force an app to only load DLL's from its program files folder. In Windows XP, Microsoft introduced side-by-side assemblies which allowed an application to describe exactly what version of a library is used so it would no longer be subjected to whatever library happened to load first. I'm not sure what, if anything, Microsoft introduced to help in this area in Windows Vista.

    Would it be crazy for the frameworks to allow an add-on to be isolated?
    Posted in: Frameworks
  • 0

    posted a message on New CKKnight Mod "Joker" Any Info Yet?
    it's sad how much venom some folks have shown on these and other forums. clearly there is some smuggery afoot which has been hurting the community. hopefully the atmosphere will change. there is no need for elitism. i agree 100% that an addons author is way more important than what library was used to make it. libraries aren't without value though. at the end of the day different users have different needs and pure speed is not always the trump card.

    some of the ace2 versions of perfectly good non-ace addons are still worthwhile. for instance, itemrack is arguably the best addon of its kind but i prefer to use closetgnome because of personal preference in user interface. i use whatever addons work best for my needs be they ace addons or not. i admit that i jokingly tell my guildies stuff like "if it's not ace it's crap" but they know i am just kidding around.

    sometimes i take a weekend and go through the ace repository to see what i can do with purely ace addons, but that is purely to see what the community has been up to. sometimes i find gems which i switch to. other times i go right back to the non-ace addons. over time i have developed a preference for certain authors.

    to get back to the spirit of the original post a bit, i use quite a few of ckknight's addons and have high regard for his work in the community. i also have high regard for the work of many other devs in the ace community such as ammo, rabbit, tekkub, neriak, nymbia, andreasg, claidhaire, sylvanaar, maia, turan, kaelten, just to name a few off the top of my head.
    Posted in: General AddOns
  • 0

    posted a message on Prat 2.0 Chat Mod Framework (Official Thread)
    expanded the ability to use of font flags in the fonts module.

    example 1: top - no outline, no monochrome; bottom - no outline, monochrome


    example 2: top - outline, no monochrome; bottom - outline, monochrome


    example 3: top - thick outline, no monochrome; bottom - thick outline, monochrome


    lots of options to make your font of choice look its best. :)
    note: this was a data change so if you used outline before, you'll have to set it again.
    Posted in: General AddOns
  • 0

    posted a message on Prat 2.0 Chat Mod Framework (Official Thread)
    I think the source of my confusion initially was the use of the term "outline" when refering to what this option originally was said to toggle. It doesn't change the text into a font outline as suggested, it is really toggling the filter on the text from shadow to glow.

    Text with the shadow filter:


    Text with the glow filter:


    When I was working on my menu update, I got to that option and got stuck on stupid about the idea that the option wasn't really an outline font. Now after sorting out the details I would like to look into adding an option to change the color of the glow filter. Then we can do something like a radio option where if "toggle shadow" is enabled then "shadow color" is enabled with "toggle glow" and "glow color" disabled and vice versa.
    Posted in: General AddOns
  • 0

    posted a message on Prat 2.0 Chat Mod Framework (Official Thread)
    Quote from sylvanaar »

    When checked it shows the font with a drop shadow. When unchecked it shows the font with an outline.

    The default setting is checked - ie. the normal font - which has a drop shadow. Normal font = drop shadow.

    I'll let Curney sort it out when he has time, i was just making the default match the correct behavior so everyone doesnt have to change it. Before I changed it it was defaulting to outline fonts.
    *snip*


    Ironically I changed the name of this option for the sake of clarity haha. When I changed the name I should have changed the way it handled the value so it would show as shadowed by default. Thanks for addressing that. The main reason I changed the name was to make it match up with the shadow color option. Something to basically indicate when the shadow color should be visible in the chatwindows.
    Posted in: General AddOns
  • 0

    posted a message on Prat 2.0: frFR-many many translation errors in last revision (46393)
    Look in the lua file for the "enUS" strings and translate them to "frFR".

    All of the necessary strings are in the enUS section.

    For instance in the timestamps.lua file look for..
    L:RegisterTranslations("enUS", function() return {
      ["Timestamps"] = true,
      ["Chat window timestamp options."] = true,
      ["Set Separately"] = true,
      ["Toggle setting options separately for each chat window."] = true,
      ["Show Timestamp"] = true,
      ["Toggle showing timestamp for each window."] = true,
      ["Show ChatFrame%d Timestamp"] = true,
      ["Toggle showing timestamp on and off."] = true,
      ["show_name"] = "Show Timestamp",
      ["show_desc"] = "Toggle showing timestamp on and off for each window.",
      ["show_perframename"] = "Show %s Timestamp",
      ["show_perframedesc"] = "Toggle showing timestamp on and off.",
      ["Format Timestamp"] = true,
      ["Set timestamp format (strftime) for each chat window."] = true,
      ["Format ChatFrame%d Timestamp"] = true,
      ["Set format of timestamp (strftime)."] = true,
      ["Show All Timestamps"] = true,
      ["Toggle showing timestamp for all chat windows."] = true,
      ["Format All Timestamps"] = true,
      ["Set timestamp format (strftime) for all chat windows."] = true,
      ["colortimestamp_name"] = "Color Timestamp",
      ["colortimestamp_desc"] = "Toggle coloring the timestamp on and off.",
      ["Set Timestamp Color"] = true,
      ["Sets the color of the timestamp."] = true,
      ["localtime_name"] = "Use Local Time",
      ["localtime_desc"] = "Toggle using local time on and off.",
      ["space_name"] = "Show Space",
      ["space_desc"] = "Toggle adding space after timestamp on and off.",
      ["Help"] = true,
      ["How to customize timestamps."] = true,
    } end)

    For each item on the left of the equal symbol you need a translation in quotes.

    I am not sure who put in the french translations originally, so if it wasn't you and you're not comfortable doing a translation, then hopefully someone will step up.
    Posted in: General AddOns
  • 0

    posted a message on Prat 2.0 Chat Mod Framework (Official Thread)
    the localization will need to catch up unfortunately. several of the modules had missing translations for many strings before i made any changes so this localization lag has been around for a while it appears. however on a positive note, if you provide the french translations for the enUS strings i will be happy to update them for you. :)
    Posted in: General AddOns
  • 0

    posted a message on Prat 2.0: frFR-many many translation errors in last revision (46393)
    the names and descriptions of some options have been updated and translations will need to be updated. my apologies for the inconvenience. the necessary string definitions are in the enUS localization section. if you are able to make the necessary updates and paste them here i would be happy to update the files. unfortunately i do not know french.
    Posted in: General AddOns
  • To post a comment, please or register a new account.