Jump to content


Photo
accepted

STEP Patches



  • Please log in to reply
500 replies to this topic

#16 z929669

z929669

    Ixian Inventor

  • Administrator
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,062 posts

Posted 30 October 2013 - 04:31 PM

Agre on DLC. I propose to introduce this as a requirement for STEP and then we can do away with all of that nonsense.

#17 Nearox

Nearox

    Jarl

  • VIP-Supporter
  • PipPipPip
  • 1,393 posts

Posted 30 October 2013 - 04:31 PM

Unofrtunately I couldn't get online much last week... damn boss. Will 2.2.8 be the version where we take into account the USKP 2.0 changes for compatibility or will we be doing that for 2.2.9? Seeing as we are going to be making patches, I'd say we better start sooner rather than later as we probably need multiple people going over a patch to ensure STEP users that the patch is 100% proper. But for that we'd need to have a definitive framework of mods to work with for STEP:Core. Is there any core mod currently being reconsidered for inclusion/exclusion? With regards to sound in general, what is your current state of opinion with regards to Audio Sound Overhaul?
  • 0

#18 z929669

z929669

    Ixian Inventor

  • Administrator
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,062 posts

Posted 30 October 2013 - 04:40 PM

We'll do it for 2.2.8, so next release ... one patch for Skyrim (Skyrim = Skyrim + DG + HF + DB).

#19 EssArrBee

EssArrBee

    Incompatibilism Manager

  • VIP-Supporter
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,461 posts

Posted 30 October 2013 - 04:49 PM

We need to talk to kryp and see what kind of ETA he has on updates, if any, for WAF. Then we can discuss what fixes to forward from the unofficial patches and what to forward from WAF. Personally, I like some of the stuff that kryp did and some that the USKP team did. As for CORE the patch will address that USKP/WAF conflict and just a few other tiny things, and for Extended it is mostly cell and worldspace fixes that need forwarding for few mods, like wearable lanterns, and all three SoS mods plus everything from the CORE patch. Might not be to much work, maybe I'll do a quick patch tonight and to start getting an idea of what all we want to include. @Nearox I haven't looked over Audio Sound Overhaul, but we should put together a MT thread. Just bug tech to get it started.
  • 0

#20 z929669

z929669

    Ixian Inventor

  • Administrator
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,062 posts

Posted 30 October 2013 - 06:52 PM

kryptopyr is a 'she' BTW ;) ... and she is sulually on the ball when it comes to updates and patches.

#21 EssArrBee

EssArrBee

    Incompatibilism Manager

  • VIP-Supporter
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,461 posts

Posted 30 October 2013 - 09:56 PM

Aww... A thousand pardons, Ms. kryp.

Here's a patch for extended, just to get the ball rolling. Left a few mods out. I'm not that good with Dialogue, but all the worldspace stuff and cell edits that needed weather and location changes, like SoS. Tons of changes to Wearable Lanterns, so many adjustments to the positions of the placed lights, so many.

Also, all DLC is required.
  • 0

#22 Nearox

Nearox

    Jarl

  • VIP-Supporter
  • PipPipPip
  • 1,393 posts

Posted 31 October 2013 - 08:41 AM

Nice work EssArrbee. I'm just thinking at the moment that it really would be more beneficial to first make single patches and to only combine them into a big patch when they are deemed finished. Individual patches allows for much better overview and information for us. It is easier to keep track of changes. If multiple people were to edit one big patch, it could easily become chaotic to the point where nobody knows why and how things were patched the way they were. Moreover if mods are added or removed to STEP later the entire big patch would have to be re-edited and re-distributed to end-users each time affected STEP:Core and/or Extended mods change.  Using a TES5Edit script, we can combine all the patches into one big patch later on anyways, it takes 5 minutes or less :) I'd propose seperate patches for each mod that needs patching according to the following types: 1. Mod X - DLCs  2. Mod X - USKPs 3. Mod X - Mod Y Each patch should have a predesignated naming format which includes version information. For instance: 1. Patch W.A.T.E.R. 1.87 - HF + DB 2. Patch W.A.T.E.R. 1.87 - USKP 2.0 3. Patch W.A.T.E.R. 1.87 - ASO 1.5 We could obviously still publish one big patch for those with full STEP:Core or Extended installs. I just personally can't find an argument for the benefits of one big patch over individual patches - safe from that the latter initially requires perhaps slightly more work.  Furthermore, publishing the individual patches at the STEP Nexus site woudl not only increase the visibility of STEP but it would also mean that the work we do on the patches would be of additional benefit for the modding community that does not use STEP. After all, individual patches will allow those users to also make use of our patches. 
  • 0

#23 rootsrat

rootsrat

    High King

  • Mod Author
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,610 posts

Posted 31 October 2013 - 09:21 AM

Also, we could have dedicated STEP Dropbox account with a changelog document for this sort of thing, so that there is always the latest version available with changes audit.
  • 0

#24 TechAngel85

TechAngel85

    Akatosh

  • Administrator
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 12,987 posts

Posted 31 October 2013 - 10:48 AM

I'm for the single big patch. It's less time consuming for the users, a hell of a lot less downloading and takes up less ESP slots which we've already figured out should be kept less than 128. Individual patches will quickly clutter up the Nexus page. I'm not against individual patches for the more popular mods; however, the larger single patch I think is the way to go. We have never do it and simply can not cater to ever single situation. Having one patch for Core and one patch for Extended is the better solution, imo, for those that are following those guides. Then if users add in additional mods, then it's up to them to patch. I middle ground solution would be to add the TES5Edit instructions to the mod pages, which I'm 100% for; however, Z doesn't seem to want to do it for some reason. I think he thinks it'll add into much complications for the users that aren't advanced enough; however, we can simply put a "For Advanced Users Only:" header in to solve that.

#25 rootsrat

rootsrat

    High King

  • Mod Author
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,610 posts

Posted 31 October 2013 - 11:03 AM

I'm for the single big patch. It's less time consuming for the users, a hell of a lot less downloading and takes up less ESP slots which we've already figured out should be kept less than 128. Individual patches will quickly clutter up the Nexus page. I'm not against individual patches for the more popular mods; however, the larger single patch I think is the way to go. We have never do it and simply can not cater to ever single situation. Having one patch for Core and one patch for Extended is the better solution, imo, for those that are following those guides. Then if users add in additional mods, then it's up to them to patch.

I middle ground solution would be to add the TES5Edit instructions to the mod pages, which I'm 100% for; however, Z doesn't seem to want to do it for some reason. I think he thinks it'll add into much complications for the users that aren't advanced enough; however, we can simply put a "For Advanced Users Only:" header in to solve that.


Fair enough for the big patch for Nexus page clarity and simplicity. +1

Adding detailed instructions... That's A LOT of editing work on Wiki, some mods require tons of records to be corrected. Not saying STE:Core/Extended specifically, but in general - I don't know what its the case with S:C and S:E. Plus, this would surely create more unnecessary support requests from less experienced users (I don't think that saying For Experienced Users Only will stop the less exp. to try and do it anyway :D ).

We'd be better off providing the patches for download.
  • 0

#26 deathneko11

deathneko11

    Southern Otaku

  • Mod Author
  • Pip
  • 376 posts

Posted 31 October 2013 - 11:05 AM

I think it's a good idea to do the big patches. Not that my 2cents is likely to be worth much here :p because really, if you're going to mod your game in the first place then you at least need to try to have a basic understanding of how things work. I find it likely that a large percentage of users that use the large patches will be able to add or take away with some basic knowledge, and that knowledge is not hard to come by if they have access to the wikis here explaining how to make small edits for patch work through tes5edit. I recommend that if we do add TES5edit to the mod pages, we first put a condensed user friendly guide up and then add underneath that more technical details for those more advanced users that want to dig deeper and make more changes than say a beginner modder.
  • 0

#27 EssArrBee

EssArrBee

    Incompatibilism Manager

  • VIP-Supporter
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,461 posts

Posted 31 October 2013 - 12:03 PM

From my experience doing this last night, there is no reason to release multiple patches for CORE. The amount of changes that would go into that patch would be minimal and easy to document. That is why I didn't even post it, just to small until we get an update from kryp, since WAF is main conflict. As for extended, we should only use one or two patches IMO. The first would be the CORE patch and anything from a mod that is no longer updated that often and needs forwarding from the unofficial patches or DLC. The second patch would be an evolving patch that would address temporary fixes and conflicts that we know would become redundant from mods that are still being maintained on a regular basis. Ex: Point the Way, does not forward a couple things from the unofficial patches, but being that the author is part of the unofficial patches team, it makes sense those conflicts will be resolved in a couple weeks. Put that in the temp patch. SoS, on the other hand, has not been updated in months and a few unofficial patches have come out since its last update. Put those changes in the main patch.
  • 0

#28 Nearox

Nearox

    Jarl

  • VIP-Supporter
  • PipPipPip
  • 1,393 posts

Posted 31 October 2013 - 12:31 PM

I understand your arguments for the big patch for Core, seeing as I suppose it is going to be assumed that STEP users will always install the full core package at least, and then build other mods on top if it.

The issue I have about the big patch for extended is that it would completely remove the modular concept from STEP. At the moment, users have a choice which extended mods to include or exclude. When we are making 1 big patch for extended, we are basically telling users that step is no longer modular and that they now must install all the mods affected by the patch. The only way they could resolve this is to manually remove masters from the patch, which kind of defeates the purpose of keeping it as simple as possible for end-users.

What I'm asking is, if that is the intention or not? I'm still relatively new to the STEP scene so I may not be 100% aware of all the plans. 
  • 0

#29 EssArrBee

EssArrBee

    Incompatibilism Manager

  • VIP-Supporter
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,461 posts

Posted 31 October 2013 - 01:03 PM

That is a good point about the masters for the patch. I'll take another look and see if I can work a big patch in a way that only CORE mods and only certain Extended mods where absolutely necessary get added. Make a second patch be the full extended patch. That would make more sense. We want to keep plugin count low as possible, so two would ideal, three would be okay, but more than that would just be a hassle to the user. They end up with all the STEP work and then we add in even more and moving around plugins, not favorable. I'll open up TES5Edit again today try and rework it so that the main extended patch tries to only keep the CORE mods as masters if possible. I'm almost certain that it would depend on Chesko updating Wearable Lanterns and SoS changes being split between the two patches. As for Waterbreathing Breathless Emerge, not sure if it is still necessary. Not good with Dialogue records. Is it like FNV, or is Skyrim a bit different?
  • 0

#30 z929669

z929669

    Ixian Inventor

  • Administrator
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 7,062 posts

Posted 31 October 2013 - 04:11 PM

[quote name=''rootsrat' pid='55760' dateline='1383229309']Also' date=' we could have dedicated STEP Dropbox account with a changelog document for this sort of thing, so that there is always the latest version available with changes audit.[/quote']
I think that we should use a DMS for this. We can install Leto.

I like Nearox's hierarchical scheme for creating patches aned the nomenclature proposal. It's meticulousness is attractive :yes:

In the meantime, I can post SRB's big patch to the Nexus as an intro version ... ? 
[quote name=''techangel85' pid='55782' dateline='1383234486']I'm for the single big patch. It's less time consuming for the users' date=' a hell of a lot less downloading and takes up less ESP slots which we've already figured out should be kept less than 128. Individual patches will quickly clutter up the Nexus page. I'm not against individual patches for the more popular mods; however, the larger single patch I think is the way to go. We have never do it and simply can not cater to ever single situation. Having one patch for Core and one patch for Extended is the better solution, imo, for those that are following those guides. Then if users add in additional mods, then it's up to them to patch.

I middle ground solution would be to add the TES5Edit instructions to the mod pages, which I'm 100% for; however, Z doesn't seem to want to do it for some reason. I think he thinks it'll add into much complications for the users that aren't advanced enough; however, we can simply put a "For Advanced Users Only:" header in to solve that.[/quote]
I missed this ... and Core approaches if not exceeds this. the max plugins should be much higher. What is your source?

I like TESEdit instructions for mod pages, but we will need to build that functionality as a modular component to Semantically store the info. Needs dev time.

Agree that one big patch is nice, but can't deny the efficiency of the clustered patches that nearox proposed.

EDIT: lastly, a Core patch makes sense, as none of the mods in STEP:Core should NOT be installed by anyone modding Skyrim. they are all absolutely critical and/or aesthetically necessary.



0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users