lynx

Jarno, it needs to be consistent in reference, not necessarily naming.

Linux doesn't need it either, unless the mod author is inconsistent in their casing of the same filenames. Or unless weidu requires it, which I doubt (it comes with tolower to fix the original chitin/files).

Or code, but it's essentially the same thing and I don't see how you could solve it any other way. IMO this should be done on the weidu level, but that of course requires changing mods.

The first part is usually handled in the package itself, for which they include script snippets (I don't think it can be solved in a declarative way, at least in the general case). Whatever BWS had may be sufficient, but you'll know better. Since mods are not to be touched, but the package files have yet to be written, all the info and/or logic needs to be in there. The external stuff is the usual bread and butter of package managers (conflicts, providers, subdependencies).

The whole point is that it doesn't need to be implemented, since it has already been done and done well. It's just about reuse, however it can affect the packaging format, since every solution comes with its own and it may be a waste of time to change it.

"conflicts + dependencies" is no minor feat, that's why I keep bringing up existing package managers that have had this solved for ages. In that sense python would be a better choice than powershell, but maybe there are some written in csharp too (eg. the windows contenders like chocolatey, nuget?).

Those mac/linux instructions only need to be done once; the same way you may need to install a non-free zip handler. 5. People who don't want to use your tool will use whatever they're using now. Only windows releases are currently bloated with weidu, so there'd be no change for the rest. If the modders want to support installs without the tool, they'll either have to complicate their instructions or still provide classical formats anyway. And since it's not at all obvious, I'm not complaining because of slow internet, but because of environmental impacts.

This is not true. Even if the user's distro does not provide a package for weidu, you still just have to download and extract it. The manager is a 3rd party tool. Not much of an upgrade there, unless the mod was packed with something really exotic. 1. Not true, but not far from it. Can be ignored. 2. File extension is irrelevant, but why have it different, if it will just be a zip archive? 3. Why does the file name matter at all? 5. This sounds ridiculous — every mod would currently pack ~10M of extra crap. If people are supposed to use a mod manager, have that ensure it has all the necessary tooling. The packages can never be self-contained, since the payload is programmatic, so there's no point in exploding the sizes with redundant files. @subtledoctorIt's up to the browser to implement, so at least for firefox the extension with a new protocol handler is possible — by the user.

Eh, it's just a name. I don't know if they changed anything with D:OS2, but in general Larian made more hack'n'slashy titles, so eh.

They're not externalised spells, just constructed and applied internally. Well, unless you're running gemrb, of course.

You're missing the point of git — all history is preserved, so even force pushes can be undone. Of course, if you rely on just the browser to interact with your repos, then you're already using a very limited subset of the power and safety git offers.

Only if it's a single measurement. Anyway, for bows it's likely 100 as set in most of them (long, x), since that would be 400 horizontal pixels. At least that what I choose to believe (no circle size additions).

Just found this. Our research also showed that item ranges are ignored and they depend just on the item type. See here for some details: https://github.com/gemrb/gemrb/issues/98

Git is a versioning system, so they can't really hurt many authors — you have a local backup automatically. Breaches like this may look intimidating, but they're easy to undo.

Think of them as of other actors, just being flat and immobile.

It should also be doable with individual ActionListEmpty(), but it'd result in several blocks just to check all the party sizes.

These things come to mind: 1. If you're modding iwd2, it has an objectRect parameter to object specifiers, which supposedly limits the matching to the specified region. 2. A creature and PersonalSpaceDistance checks. Invisible if needed. 3. Trigger regions at the destinations, then checking via IsOverMe.

That bit that you mention is only for following into subareas. To move between main (master) areas, the creatures need to be stored. You need MakeGlobal and MoveGlobal*, but there's no way to undo it in the original (gemrb has UnmakeGlobal), so your save files will grow a bit faster. I'm pretty sure this has been done before too (djinn mod from Argent?).

Pull requests are always welcome. As for the second point, yes, most likely.

All this and more is now fixed. All the size labels are now consistent.

I didn't test, but judging from the fact that no string in any game uses it: no.

Continuing the old tradition, here is another find from a recent trip: Previously in: Baldur's gate Fallen From Grace Aurora's shoes Found any yourself?

Any news on the redirects? Considering they were already written, why not just get an extra domain for the forum and use the main for the rest of the site and arbitrary rewrites?

Checking via cheats is no good — the values could have changed. When unexpected things happen, don't rule out other unexpected things.

to do a proper test, use the exact same code. You're missing the two global checks.