Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

improve inventory_plus compatibility #134

Open
bell07 opened this issue Mar 12, 2018 · 3 comments
Open

improve inventory_plus compatibility #134

bell07 opened this issue Mar 12, 2018 · 3 comments

Comments

@bell07
Copy link
Contributor

bell07 commented Mar 12, 2018

Issue was reported in https://forum.minetest.net/viewtopic.php?t=4654&p=313023#p312975

To solve it on inventory_plus fails: https://github.com/tenplus1/inventory_plus/issues/4

Seems the inventory_plus requires sfinv for creative. Therefore if both mods are found (inventory_plus and sfinv), the 3d_armor_ip module only should be active.

My proposal is to add next lines to 3d_armor_sfinv:

if minetest.global_exists("inventory_plus") then
	minetest.log("warning", S("3d_armor_sfinv: Mod loaded but unused preferring inventory_plus"))
	return
end
@tenplus1
Copy link
Contributor

Why don't you just disable the 3d_armor_sfinv mod itself ? If it's not running then there is no issue.

@bell07
Copy link
Contributor Author

bell07 commented Mar 12, 2018

We guess the most players does enable the whole modpack and try to avoid errors depending on them.
Therefore the inventory-compat modules does have already soft-dependencies instead of hard dependencies, and mods have at beginninc code like

if not minetest.global_exists("inventory_plus") then
	minetest.log("warning", S("3d_armor_ip: Mod loaded but unused."))
	return
end

Of course an experienced server admin can solve the issue without any change in mod just by disabling the mod.

@stujones11
Copy link
Owner

stujones11 commented Mar 13, 2018

This seems like a reasonable fix, I can see no good reason for the sfinv module to load if either of the other modules are in use, so this should perhaps include ui too?

It shouldn't be a big deal for someone to just disable the module manually but if we can make it a bit more user-friendly then, why not? At the very least, I guess this should be documented.

@bell07 Thank you once more for your assistance with this.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

3 participants