• 0

    posted a message on Rock + Ace3
    Quote from Belazor »

    Say that I have AddonX that uses LibY. LibY is disembeded, and 3 months later I delete AddonX. I now have LibY running with no addons using it.
    Unless I am horribly mistaken, if you load a library or an addon, it will still require processing time loading, even if it doesn't actually do anything/doesn't get used by any addon.
    Amirite?

    If the library is load on demand then it should not have any cost unless it is used. Otherwise it will still requiring processing time at load, some memory (though that should not be much of an issue), and depending on what features the library provides might have some run time effects as well. For example a parsing library might continue to capture and analyze chat messages, or a frame work might support 'generic' functions even without any addons using them.

    Quote from Belazor »

    Embedded libraries enables me the knowledge that if I delete AddonX and it's the ONLY thing using LibY, I just saved my computer a few cycles.

    Embedded libraries are a trade off, they are better when you are using small numbers of addons and manually managing them. Once the number of addons grows using the same libraries you do insert some risks. For example even if a duplicate library is not used it will still have to be parsed (that is read into memory and changed into a form that the computer can work with) before being discarded. Likewise it is possible that not all embedded libraries will be at the same version level. This means that when an addon with a newer version of the library is loaded, extra will be spent upgrading the libraries internal data. There is also a few risks (though nominally small) of incompatibles introduced with a new version of a library compared to what an addon was tested with. (The addon may have made some unwitting assumptions about how arguments are handled in certain cases, expect something to be true that was not in a newer version of the library etc.) This can even make finding which addon causes a problem harder to find since the problem may appear to be with a totally unrelated addon, though that can happen even without libraries involved.

    All that being said for most end users, especially ones that use a small number of 'released' or at least tagged addons, embedded is probably the way to go.

    Quote from Belazor »

    However, I choose to run WAU (when it decides to do some work instead of just eating 50% of my poor p4 :( hehe) because I want new changes and I want them now.

    Why do you want new changes? Do you need them? Yes in general it is good practice that designers test there code before commiting it but there is a price for living on the bleeding edge. In my case I update often because I love looking at code, watching patterns evolve etc., it's why I got into compiler design and software tools.
    Posted in: Frameworks
  • 0

    posted a message on addonpkg - Perl command line svn addon updater and archiver. (Mac OS X/Windows)
    addonpkg is now available from my google code page
    Posted in: Updaters
  • 0

    posted a message on Baggins - Official Thread
    Quote from Iris »

    Would be even greater if I got Baggins_ClosetGnome to work, but I'm sure I'll figure that out soon.


    You can find a set of instructions for Baggins_ClosetGnome in the pluggin's thread. Though Baggins interface to Category and Bag creation has changed a bit since those were written so the exact clicks might be a little different. Let me know if you still have questions about it.
    Posted in: General AddOns
  • 0

    posted a message on Rock + Ace3
    Quote from Industrial »

    use of externals in svn has nothing to do with the (dis)ability of disembedding.

    Of course it isn't required, but it does make it easier since an ignore-externals option can do most of the work.
    Posted in: Frameworks
  • 0

    posted a message on Rock + Ace3
    Quote from Nickenyfiken »

    I think the new policy should be that all addons have their externals pointing to tagged versions of the libs. So when a new Major.minor version of a library is tested and working it gets tagged and addon authors can upgrade to that version if they want/need. Problem may be that libs don't get tested well enough.

    Actually I like that idea. Gives addon developers a stable target, while still allowing expert users, testers and developers the ability to run disembed and test beta versions of a library.

    Quote from Nickenyfiken »

    I also think that this site should encourage authors to release addons on addon sites. Remove the whole zip updating part thing or make a proper addon release site or start cooperating with a already existing one. Maybe if a developer tag it's addon for release it automatically get updated on the release site.

    Going further it might make sense to only archive tagged addons. And maybe even have the files page point to the release sites if the addons TOC has an entry for one.
    Posted in: Frameworks
  • 0

    posted a message on Rock + Ace3
    Quote from tekkub »

    Quote from Tuller »

    The SVN also has the advantage of many eyes. I personally read through all* the code changes of the addons and libraries I use when ever I update. And if I see a problem I will try to report it to the right people (often with a fix or work around). I doubt I'm the only one that does that.

    You're a special case. Most users only download new versions whenever there is a new patch, or something breaks. They want stable downloads.


    That's cause it's easy to do when you use a handful of addons. When you have, oh, 180 libs and addons... not so easy. Reason why real releases are a good thing.


    My addon folder sits at 447 libs and addons, though I disembed everything, so the actual number of "real" addons is much smaller). However only a few addons get updated at the same time and often there are a lot of identical changes when stuff gets changed, especially as new coding practices are evolved. It really is quite impressive to see how quickly such techniques can spread, especially right after improved profiling was made available. I guess I may have over estimated the number of people that love reading code or are paranoid about what the addons they run actually do. ((The CT_RaidAssist 1.501 incident changed my practice from just skimming to actually reading all the code. My package tool addonpkg actually started life as part of a addon code inspection suite.))

    P.S. Just so I don't get misunderstood. I think tagged releases and bundles are a very good thing especially for the average user. It's just I worry that an embed only solution during the development cycle (which is what SVN should be) is not the right approach.
    Posted in: Frameworks
  • 0

    posted a message on WAU and SVN
    If you really want the SVN versions, you can use the svn program to download the addons directly. Or use a svn updater wrapper that does that for you. For example dafire's script or my addonpkg.
    Posted in: Updaters
  • 0

    posted a message on Rock + Ace3
    Quote from Industrial »

    I've got an idea for externals:

    let's stop using externals totally.

    What this will mean, afaik;

    1. If you know that what you are using now is stable, it wont get shafted by unstable library updates in the future.

    As long as libs can self update even embedded libraries are susceptible to bugs fixed in an update.
    Quote from Industrial »

    2. If you know that what you are using now is unstable, do something about it and commit a working version of the library.

    This should be true regardless of if the library is embedded or not. But for addons with embedded libraries that aren't using externals it means that that they will also have to be updated. Which increases the changes that addons will get mixed.
    Quote from Industrial »

    3. There will be no more external pulling == less load on the servers.

    True, but for people grabbing only a few addons I cant imagine the change of load will be much different. And for people grabbing a lot of addons it could actually increase the loads on the server if they are currently using smart tools (or svn directly) that don't bring in the externals.
    Quote from Industrial »

    4. Addon authors are encouraged to check the state of a library, and to ensure stability.

    Assuming proper library development techniques (i.e. unit test, standardized API, switching majors when incompatibilities are added) the risk should not be that bad. Also with shared libraries it means that problems in the library will be found much sooner. If a problem is found, even if the end user is not a coder, it's easy enough to go back to an older version.

    The SVN also has the advantage of many eyes. I personally read through all* the code changes of the addons and libraries I use when ever I update. And if I see a problem I will try to report it to the right people (often with a fix or work around). I doubt I'm the only one that does that.

    This reminds me a lot of the Cathedral vs Bazaar debate of yore.

    * - Okay I just skim the updates for addons such as Tattle, and PeriodicTable -- but that is mostly data changes.
    Posted in: Frameworks
  • 0

    posted a message on Bag scaling addon?
    I believe one of the recent changes to the default UI was to scale bags when many are open at once. This is probably what is causing your ContainerFrame1:SetScale(0.8) to be reset. Considering that you don't like All in One type baggin addons, the other type you should probably check out is addons like Baggins and Advanced Bags Plus. They filter items into multiple virtual bags.
    Posted in: General Chat
  • 0

    posted a message on Baggins - Official Thread
    Quote from murazor »

    I had the same problem some time ago, but I use closetgnome (said closetgnome wasn't loaded).


    I just uploaded the same fix that I applied for Baggins_ItemRack to Baggins_ClosetGnome (r47518). Again I wasn't able to reproduce the problem so I can't be certain that it is fixed.
    Posted in: General AddOns
  • 0

    posted a message on Baggins - Official Thread
    Quote from Joffe »

    I'm having the same problem right now with Baggins_ItemRack since a few days ago, no ItemRack categories are working. Reverting the last change in Baggins_ItemRack.lua resolves the problem for me.


    I've still not be able to reproduce the problem, though have just uploaded a new version of Baggins_ItemRack with a potential fix. If anyone that was seeing the problem with r47286 could give it a try and let me know if it's still happening or not I would appreciate it.
    Posted in: General AddOns
  • 0

    posted a message on Baggins - Official Thread
    Quote from Elsia »

    Heal Set
    Rules: (ItemRack not loaded)

    However ItemRack is loaded and functional, Baggins_ItemRack is loaded as well (according to LoadIt).

    All other categories, like my resistance gear ones work fine.


    I assume your resistance gear rule is also an ItemRack rule. Strange that it would be working for one rule and not another. Could you email me your Baggins.lua file from your SavedVariables directory? Can you recreate the rule?
    Posted in: General AddOns
  • 0

    posted a message on Baggins - Official Thread
    Quote from Elsia »

    Edit: Actually, i can't get my item-rack based categories to show anymore. All just shows up in the generic equipment category or as misc. Rules are as before but they don't seem to be operational.


    What rules are you using for your itemrack categories? What version of Baggins_ItemRack? What version of ItemRack? I recently made some changes to Baggins_ItemRack to work around some bugs in ItemRack's storage of items with negative suffix ids. While I don't think this should have broken anything, it might be related.
    Posted in: General AddOns
  • 0

    posted a message on AceComm 2.0 transmitting inaccurately?
    For the last number in an item strings only the lower 16 bits matter. See http://www.wowwiki.com/ItemString for details. My assumption is that Ace2 strips the extra bits of the unique id when compressing item links for transmission. The only thing in practice the links should lose is information about who crafted the item.
    Posted in: Libraries
  • 0

    posted a message on ClosetGnome - Wear it or lose it.
    Quote from Pusikas »

    Another thing, hope it wasn't answered before: I got me a Carrot on a Stick - my first item that increases mount speed. I made a set called "Riding" that only has a single trinket slot and put the carrot there. It works. The carrot gets equipped when I mount up, and switched back to the old set when I dismount. But: Unlike all other items, the carrot's set doesn't show in the tooltip, and promptly, the carraot isn't put into the correct bag by baggins. This is related, since baggins seems to rely on the tooltips to see if an item belongs to a set.


    Baggins_ClosetGnome doesn't use the tooltip to determine if an item belongs to a set, but instead uses ClosetGnome's database. I might need to add item fuzzing similar to what was done for Baggins_ItemRack if it's related to the uniqId part of the item string.
    Posted in: General AddOns
  • To post a comment, please or register a new account.