And since I was so good at explaining myself the last couple of posts, I'll try again:
-For BWS fixes, all I'd like to see is one post in a mod's forum/thread, stating the bug and ideally the measures of fix being integrated. I do not expect long converations with the modder, repeatedly sent messages, pleas for integration - none of that. But one post. And this post, before the fix is integrated. Or, if that's not possible, shortly aftrwards.
Why? Not because the modder's code is being touched, but:
-because the modder not scanning all IE forums repeatedly now knows there is a problem
-and also that and how it is addressed for fix
-but also, because players with the same problem now see that their problem is a known one
-and also players see that it is addressed (fixed) via the fixpack
-and, please don't take this the wrong way but read this post until the end to see an example: because just in case the provided fix isn't perfect, there might be someone else spotting it - who otherwise might not have.
The last three points do make sense to all of us? To me they do a lot.
This is what I meant with "courtesy". It was the wrong choice of words, because it was heard towards the modder only, but it was also meant towards the players, towards the community. Respect on the one hand, but also useful to the community (win-win).
Key line:
After the time and dedication to provide a fix for a mod that is not your own, how someone is not interested in spreading the news (not to gloat, but to inform players and other modders it's actually there) is out of my understanding.
For the record: I am happy about the EET compatibility patches provided in BWPFixpack for my Ajantis BGII mod because releasing them with the mod would mean I'd need to create an interim version to the local version I am developping currently. I thank everyone involved very much, also for patching these changes to work with v14 that was released hastily by me.
I was also happy about fixes being integrated into BWPFixpack for my mods because I had several longer times of hiatus the last couple of years. I thank for those, too.
But also: I am not so happy that fixes that sit in the BWPFixpack do not get revised as repeatedly as some expect modders to go through the fixpack themselves. And also, sometimes fixes only cover up bugs but do not fix them. (Before this is seen as a general bad-mouthing: I am referring to the fixes provided for Ascalon's Breagar in this case. The new lines for the STATE_WHICH_SAYS don't make any sense at all, the switch of ACVIRGI.D and ACVIRGI2.D in the tp2 erased the install error but are the opposite of what was intended in the mod. Replacing the %EDWIN_STATE_X% with a fixed number leads to wrong dlg patching for EET. These are patches which have to serve as a good/bad" example why integrating fixes silently [although I do not know whether these were integrated silently as I wasn't the mod's maintainer when they were provided] is a bad idea.)
And as a note: I was unable to locate a link to the BWP Fixpack GitHub repository starting at SHS MegaMod Help forum when looking up the AC_Bre fixes for this post. I ended up using GitHub's search function to find it. I am ready to agree that I might not be the smartest in this regard, but after all the discussion and being at the repository several times I would assume I'd be able to find a link if it's provided at an obvious place. Before this isn't available, all talk about modders should having to spent looking there at regular times and how can anyone not know about BWPFixpack yet is mute, imho.
Edited by jastey, 13 November 2017 - 12:04 AM.