KSP-RO / ProceduralParts

A continuation of StretchySRBs, which is a continuation of StretchyTanks
71 stars 79 forks source link

Fixes for 1.2.0 Preview Release #214

Closed Timestorm closed 8 years ago

Timestorm commented 8 years ago

It seems PartResouce is no longer Destroyable. I changed it to .Remove(res) from partResources and removed the final cycle of Destroying PartResouce in partResources

I changed the clearing of the resource list (part.Resources.list) to clear the dictionary (part.Resources.dict)

Below are just capitalization changes that have changed in 1.2.0 part.findAttachNode -> part.FindAttachNode part.findAttachNodeByPart -> part.FindAttachNodeByPart

Polymaker commented 8 years ago

@Timestorm From the Modders notes

PartResource is no longer derived from MonoBehaviour, PartResources are built as part of the PartSet for a vessel.

So part.Resources.dict.Clear() seems like the good way now. Aside from that, do you get ArgumentOutOfRangeException when you try to place the parts in symmetry?

Timestorm commented 8 years ago

I do, seems nice and broken. Let me debug it really fast >.< :-)

Polymaker commented 8 years ago

Well don't worry about that, I already found out and fixed the problem. I posted an issue about this yesterday. I haven't made a pull request yet because I am to be a collaborator soon and I'll merge myself.

Timestorm commented 8 years ago

Ok, just making sure it wasn't on my side. I personally like pull requests, it allows for collaboration.

Polymaker commented 8 years ago

Yes I agree with you, but if you look there still requests pending from last year, because no one at the moment is managing the mod so I didn't bother to make (another) pull requests until I will be able to maintain the mod. And also, to fix the bug I had to mess around with the code alot so I haven't yet finished to clean up. I created the issue yesterday with the aim of letting people know that it was resolved to prevent you or others wasting time debugging.

aggie88 commented 8 years ago

Polymaker and timestorm thanks for 1.2 this is one of my must have mods. If and when you guys have time can you take a look at my cfg file for usi- ls compatibility, it is one of the 5 pull request on file. Thanks

jrodrigv commented 8 years ago

Hi guys, Is any of you recompiling & fixing the mod for 1.2? @Polymaker I have seen that you are developing new features for this mod. Do you have any plans to do a pre-release for 1.2 soon?

Polymaker commented 8 years ago

Yes I finished the corrections for 1.2 but at the moment I don't have write access to the repository. Only swamp-ig and nathanknell can merge the pull requests. And I know that nathanknell is busy for the moment (he is on the dev team)

aggie88 commented 8 years ago

Thanks for your hard work

Rafael A. Acevedo MAJ (P), FA

On Sep 17, 2016, at 16:47, James William Turner notifications@github.com wrote:

Yes I finished the corrections for 1.2 but at the moment I don't have write access to the repository. Only swamp-ig and nathanknell can merge the pull requests. And I know that nathanknell is busy for the moment (he is on the dev team)

— You are receiving this because you commented. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub, or mute the thread.

OtherBarry commented 8 years ago

I can too! Is there a preferred order I should merge them?

Polymaker commented 8 years ago

You can merge this request and I'll make a pull request for the other fixes tomorrow. (You can also merge my other request about SRBs nozzle deflection)

OtherBarry commented 8 years ago

Done and Done. Messaged @Swamp-Ig as well, said she'd add you soon.

Swamp-Ig commented 8 years ago

I've added @Polymaker :)

Polymaker commented 8 years ago

Thank you very much! Polyhedral shapes and Mk2/Mk3 will be coming soon!

aggie88 commented 8 years ago

Can you merge 208 usi-ls cfg file.

Rafael A. Acevedo MAJ (P), FA

On Sep 17, 2016, at 22:34, James William Turner notifications@github.com wrote:

Thank you very much! Polyhedral shapes and Mk2/Mk3 will be coming soon!

— You are receiving this because you commented. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub, or mute the thread.