FFAPI's job is only to bridge implementation of the Fabric transfer API to the capability system, nothing more (at least I see it this way).
Fabric's own lookup API considers Inventory instances to be a valid Storage because otherwise it would have no compat with Vanilla inventories. Forge however chose a different path by explicitly providing capability providers for selected Vanilla blocks. As such it is Forge's responsibility to bridge Vanilla blocks to the capability system and not ours by accidentally making everything that implements Inventory provide an ITEM_HANDLER capability.
This change only affects Forge mods that try to access inventories of Fabric Mods. This will now only work if the Fabric Mod explicitly provides a Storage implementation or implements SidedStorageBlockEntity. I think this is fine, because really that is how Fabric mods should use the transfer API, right?
Fabric mods that access inventories via ItemStorage.SIDED will have the same semantics as before. I was thinking however, that we should maybe move the item handler capability to be the first fallback - in case Forge provides an item handler for a Vanilla block that implements Inventory. Thoughts @Su5eD?
FFAPI's job is only to bridge implementation of the Fabric transfer API to the capability system, nothing more (at least I see it this way).
Fabric's own lookup API considers
Inventory
instances to be a validStorage
because otherwise it would have no compat with Vanilla inventories. Forge however chose a different path by explicitly providing capability providers for selected Vanilla blocks. As such it is Forge's responsibility to bridge Vanilla blocks to the capability system and not ours by accidentally making everything that implementsInventory
provide anITEM_HANDLER
capability.This change only affects Forge mods that try to access inventories of Fabric Mods. This will now only work if the Fabric Mod explicitly provides a
Storage
implementation or implementsSidedStorageBlockEntity
. I think this is fine, because really that is how Fabric mods should use the transfer API, right?Fabric mods that access inventories via
ItemStorage.SIDED
will have the same semantics as before. I was thinking however, that we should maybe move the item handler capability to be the first fallback - in case Forge provides an item handler for a Vanilla block that implementsInventory
. Thoughts @Su5eD?Fixes #87