Jump to content


Photo

Naming Scheme for Automatic STEP


  • Please log in to reply
27 replies to this topic

#16 TechAngel85

TechAngel85

    Akatosh

  • Administrators
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 11,797 posts

Posted 19 February 2013 - 10:47 PM

[quote='stoppingby4now' pid='26101' dateline='1361324106']
[quote name=''MontyMM' pid='26094' dateline='1361321182']I think this is the misunderstanding - there will be no overwrites. When the mods are repackaged' date=' only those files that will be required from each source archive will be included in the converted archives - files that would be overwritten are omitted. If you unpacked all the new archives into one folder, nothing would conflict.[/quote']
The only problem with that is you disrupt the archive, causing it to be completely repackaged should upstream mod choices change which affect it. It also hinders testing. Why not let the mod installation tools that handle this perfectly well already continue to maintain conflicts?

You also have to keep in mind that STEP is not tied to Mod version. When a new version is released, and a user follows the guide at a later date, there is the potential for new (or removed) files. I just see this kind of extra management outside of the mod installers having the potential to cause far more problems than we are attempting to solve.[/quote]
I'm with Stopping on this one. I think not having the mod managers handle the conflicts is a recipe for issues down the road. It's just not setting well with me, even though I can't think of specific examples for potential issues at the moment (just got off work and brain is a little slow :wacko: ). I don't think that we need to build functionality into anything that is perfectly handled by another tool that will be used...in this case, the mod managers...redundant, IMO.

#17 z929669

z929669

    Ixian Inventor

  • Administrators
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 9,245 posts

Posted 20 February 2013 - 12:01 AM

As an interim solution, I think MM's pet project will work nicely for 75% or more of STEP users. He has a solid plan and is well on his way to scripting up a STEP recipe. Don't think of it as a final solution so much as a stepping stone. It will be instructive and useful .... for awhaaaaaile maybe longer ... ... if I doooo -- wooHOOOoo -- Aymeeee wat ya wanna dooooOOh ....

#18 stoppingby4now

stoppingby4now

    Sleepy

  • Administrators
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,281 posts

Posted 20 February 2013 - 12:42 AM

Tech's format is better, as it keeps sorting accurate. You have to have a means of ensuring that order is interpreted correctly when importing in-mass.

If I had the time, I'd work on submitting a patch for WB, but for now they only correctly match on a Mod via a certain format (for being able to link to the Nexus page). So, a better format would be:

SECTION.ORDER-Mod Short Name-NexusID-#_#.7z

G.004-Skyrim Flora Overhaul-141-1_75.7z

BCF's would need to be the same, but with -BCF at the end. But, these will eventually become unnecessary once we can get a tool to repackage. Maintaining BCF's long term is just a PITA.

Just to clarify, the Nexus ID needs to be like *NexusID<---->.7z

AFAIK, there can be up to four non-number, non-letter (other?) characters after the trailing Nexus ID

I'm not sure what the format you put there is meant to convey. The example I gave is the only one that is recognized by WB, and is also the default format for archives when downloaded from the Nexus (*NexusID-#_#.7z). The version number can have alphanumeric only if I recall (letters and numbers), and periods have to be represented by an underscore.

#19 MontyMM

MontyMM

    High King

  • Site Founders
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,144 posts

Posted 20 February 2013 - 04:48 AM

Remember that this is purely experimental at this stage, and there are reasons for the choices I've made at this point. As I mentioned, the tools can applied in many different ways in the future, and we can have a more focused debate on the best application when things are a bit more advanced.
  • 0

#20 z929669

z929669

    Ixian Inventor

  • Administrators
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 9,245 posts

Posted 20 February 2013 - 12:02 PM


Tech's format is better, as it keeps sorting accurate. You have to have a means of ensuring that order is interpreted correctly when importing in-mass.

If I had the time, I'd work on submitting a patch for WB, but for now they only correctly match on a Mod via a certain format (for being able to link to the Nexus page). So, a better format would be:

SECTION.ORDER-Mod Short Name-NexusID-#_#.7z

G.004-Skyrim Flora Overhaul-141-1_75.7z

BCF's would need to be the same, but with -BCF at the end. But, these will eventually become unnecessary once we can get a tool to repackage. Maintaining BCF's long term is just a PITA.

Just to clarify, the Nexus ID needs to be like *NexusID<---->.7z

AFAIK, there can be up to four non-number, non-letter (other?) characters after the trailing Nexus ID

I'm not sure what the format you put there is meant to convey. The example I gave is the only one that is recognized by WB, and is also the default format for archives when downloaded from the Nexus (*NexusID-#_#.7z). The version number can have alphanumeric only if I recall (letters and numbers), and periods have to be represented by an underscore.

WB will recognize either *NexusID.7z or *NexusID-1_0.7z OR *.NexusID----.7z (and other variations of that last)

It does not matter what comes before, so version ID should not be appended to the end IMO. Too much room for error. If ending with Nexus ID, there is never any problem.

#21 stoppingby4now

stoppingby4now

    Sleepy

  • Administrators
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,281 posts

Posted 20 February 2013 - 02:28 PM



Tech's format is better, as it keeps sorting accurate. You have to have a means of ensuring that order is interpreted correctly when importing in-mass.

If I had the time, I'd work on submitting a patch for WB, but for now they only correctly match on a Mod via a certain format (for being able to link to the Nexus page). So, a better format would be:

SECTION.ORDER-Mod Short Name-NexusID-#_#.7z

G.004-Skyrim Flora Overhaul-141-1_75.7z

BCF's would need to be the same, but with -BCF at the end. But, these will eventually become unnecessary once we can get a tool to repackage. Maintaining BCF's long term is just a PITA.

Just to clarify, the Nexus ID needs to be like *NexusID<---->.7z

AFAIK, there can be up to four non-number, non-letter (other?) characters after the trailing Nexus ID

I'm not sure what the format you put there is meant to convey. The example I gave is the only one that is recognized by WB, and is also the default format for archives when downloaded from the Nexus (*NexusID-#_#.7z). The version number can have alphanumeric only if I recall (letters and numbers), and periods have to be represented by an underscore.

WB will recognize either *NexusID.7z or *NexusID-1_0.7z OR *.NexusID----.7z (and other variations of that last)

It does not matter what comes before, so version ID should not be appended to the end IMO. Too much room for error. If ending with Nexus ID, there is never any problem.

I've had the opposite experience. If I ended with NexusID with no version info, it never works. If I put the version before NexusID, it also never works. Haven't tried NexusID----.

#22 z929669

z929669

    Ixian Inventor

  • Administrators
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 9,245 posts

Posted 20 February 2013 - 03:48 PM




Tech's format is better, as it keeps sorting accurate. You have to have a means of ensuring that order is interpreted correctly when importing in-mass.

If I had the time, I'd work on submitting a patch for WB, but for now they only correctly match on a Mod via a certain format (for being able to link to the Nexus page). So, a better format would be:

SECTION.ORDER-Mod Short Name-NexusID-#_#.7z

G.004-Skyrim Flora Overhaul-141-1_75.7z

BCF's would need to be the same, but with -BCF at the end. But, these will eventually become unnecessary once we can get a tool to repackage. Maintaining BCF's long term is just a PITA.

Just to clarify, the Nexus ID needs to be like *NexusID<---->.7z

AFAIK, there can be up to four non-number, non-letter (other?) characters after the trailing Nexus ID

I'm not sure what the format you put there is meant to convey. The example I gave is the only one that is recognized by WB, and is also the default format for archives when downloaded from the Nexus (*NexusID-#_#.7z). The version number can have alphanumeric only if I recall (letters and numbers), and periods have to be represented by an underscore.

WB will recognize either *NexusID.7z or *NexusID-1_0.7z OR *.NexusID----.7z (and other variations of that last)

It does not matter what comes before, so version ID should not be appended to the end IMO. Too much room for error. If ending with Nexus ID, there is never any problem.

I've had the opposite experience. If I ended with NexusID with no version info, it never works. If I put the version before NexusID, it also never works. Haven't tried NexusID----.

I have a whole mod list with nothing but *NexusID.7z, and I constantly pull up the Nexus from the context menu, so it works, believe me :yes:

#23 stoppingby4now

stoppingby4now

    Sleepy

  • Administrators
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,281 posts

Posted 21 February 2013 - 03:11 PM





Tech's format is better, as it keeps sorting accurate. You have to have a means of ensuring that order is interpreted correctly when importing in-mass.

If I had the time, I'd work on submitting a patch for WB, but for now they only correctly match on a Mod via a certain format (for being able to link to the Nexus page). So, a better format would be:

SECTION.ORDER-Mod Short Name-NexusID-#_#.7z

G.004-Skyrim Flora Overhaul-141-1_75.7z

BCF's would need to be the same, but with -BCF at the end. But, these will eventually become unnecessary once we can get a tool to repackage. Maintaining BCF's long term is just a PITA.

Just to clarify, the Nexus ID needs to be like *NexusID<---->.7z

AFAIK, there can be up to four non-number, non-letter (other?) characters after the trailing Nexus ID

I'm not sure what the format you put there is meant to convey. The example I gave is the only one that is recognized by WB, and is also the default format for archives when downloaded from the Nexus (*NexusID-#_#.7z). The version number can have alphanumeric only if I recall (letters and numbers), and periods have to be represented by an underscore.

WB will recognize either *NexusID.7z or *NexusID-1_0.7z OR *.NexusID----.7z (and other variations of that last)

It does not matter what comes before, so version ID should not be appended to the end IMO. Too much room for error. If ending with Nexus ID, there is never any problem.

I've had the opposite experience. If I ended with NexusID with no version info, it never works. If I put the version before NexusID, it also never works. Haven't tried NexusID----.

I have a whole mod list with nothing but *NexusID.7z, and I constantly pull up the Nexus from the context menu, so it works, believe me :yes:

Ok, I found my issue. I was using _ for a separator before NexusID, which WB doesn't like. Switched to a - and it works.

#24 z929669

z929669

    Ixian Inventor

  • Administrators
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 9,245 posts

Posted 21 February 2013 - 03:15 PM

Good to know (but it does not make much sense to me!)

#25 stoppingby4now

stoppingby4now

    Sleepy

  • Administrators
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,281 posts

Posted 21 February 2013 - 03:59 PM

Did some digging, and their regular expression is only matching on a - to determine the NexusID.

#26 zone22

zone22

    Prisoner

  • Members
  • 16 posts

Posted 01 April 2013 - 08:31 AM

I would recommend leaving the mod naming scheme default. Many users Use NMM as a means of keeping track of updates for mods. Then use WB for managing load order and install packages. NMM uses the entire filename to link mods to Nexis not just the nexus ID. The dream solution would be for wb List packages using display name (name of mod) linking it to the actual package name (Filename). NMM already does this. It provides a much clearer description of what's installed.
  • 0

#27 stoppingby4now

stoppingby4now

    Sleepy

  • Administrators
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 4,281 posts

Posted 01 April 2013 - 11:24 PM

I would recommend leaving the mod naming scheme default. Many users Use NMM as a means of keeping track of updates for mods. Then use WB for managing load order and install packages. NMM uses the entire filename to link mods to Nexis not just the nexus ID. The dream solution would be for wb List packages using display name (name of mod) linking it to the actual package name (Filename). NMM already does this. It provides a much clearer description of what's installed.

Renaming archives will be ideal for an automated solution in order to ensure proper order listing when updating mods in mass. WB (and last I checked MO does as well) will order based on both timestamp and package name, which means package name will need to be changed in order to prevent a user from spending an hour re-organizing the listing.

But, this in no way should hinder the use of NMM for download management. So long as the download location is segregated, the automation tool could simply pull archives from the download location, process them, then put them in the correct location for WB or MO. This would leave the archives untouched within NMM and keep it happy.

#28 MontyMM

MontyMM

    High King

  • Site Founders
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,144 posts

Posted 02 April 2013 - 06:13 PM

I'm still tinkering away on this, when I get time. We'll have some sort of a solution before the next winter is upon us!
  • 0


0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users