RTB Development

[Headcrab Zombie]

He's talking about add-ons in RTB, not RTB itself.

Oh, of course.
I should read everything more thoroughly before I make assumptions.
I think it's good how it is.

[Ad Bot]

[Scout31]

The current system gives a clear indication of how many times it has been updated. Slapping some random decimal onto it can just make it unorganized. The simple system works just fine.

Why would anyone need to know how many times an add-on has been updated? If someone really cares, Ephi could make a update count. With the current system, if you want to make a minor update, you can edit the file, but people don't get an auto-update. If you looked at ZAPT v1 there were 4 notes telling you to re-download the file if it had been downloaded before a certain date. Some(most) people download an add-on and never look at the topic again. Some bugs might cause a huge problem. Why use a broken add-on?

[Tom]

Why would anyone need to know how many times an add-on has been updated? If someone really cares, Ephi could make a update count. With the current system, if you want to make a minor update, you can edit the file, but people don't get an auto-update. If you looked at ZAPT v1 there were 4 notes telling you to re-download the file if it had been downloaded before a certain date. Some(most) people download an add-on and never look at the topic again. Some bugs might cause a huge problem. Why use a broken add-on?

Who cares if it is "only a small update", it's still the next version. I don't think that we need to change something that works fine.

[Scout31]

Mmk... So RTB is around v15 according to this update system. So what if v3.5 was some bug fixes? Let's call it V4!

[Tom]

Mmk... So RTB is around v15 according to this update system. So what if v3.5 was some bug fixes? Let's call it V4!

That's what Blockland does and it works fine.

[Kalphiter]

That's what Blockland does and it works fine.

I don't see Blockland updating a version just for one bugfix, unless it's important.

[Marcem]

I don't see Blockland updating a version just for one bugfix, unless it's important.

Like v7. 

[Tom]

I could keep arguing how the current numbering system is much better for this use, but I don't see why you guys can't just deal with it.

[M]

If there is something wrong or broken in your mod, you update it.
If you have new content in your mod, you update it.

Minor bugfixes you edit for - the mod will work, but you need to prioritize what deserves an update and what can do with an edit. If people complain about the bug again after you've uploaded the edit to fix it, just tell them it's fixed. Same way ZAPT did it, to the best of my knowledge.

[Ephialtes]

I may disllow the editing of files post-approval in the next revision of the system so you are forced to update each time you make a change. I think any change you make should be pushed out to all users and it makes no sense to have files of the same version but with different content floating around. It defeats the purpose of a version control system entirely.

As for version numbers - it makes things a load less complicated to just go up one version number each time. I can't see any reason to change this. All it would signal is how major/minor the update is but that's irrelevant since people don't get a choice about whether they update or not.

[Space Guy]

Just replace the "Update" button with "Edit" whenever it's waiting for approval. It makes no sense to always have the two buttons but one of them always disallowed ("no updating before approved, no editing after approved")

[TomTheGeek²]

Age: 20

Looks like today is Ephi's birthday :o!

[Masterlegodude]

Happy birthday, Ephialtes!

[Cyanian]

Happy Birthday, Ephialtes!

I'm going to draw you a cake later.

[Munkey]

Happy Birthday, Ephialtes!