Anyone here familiar with how the various license types interact, when it comes to publishing a mod pack? I'm concerned about taking a mod with X license and putting it in a mod with Y license where Y license might imply certain rights or restrictions that X license doesn't allow for.
Specifically:
Most of the mods I'm including have some variation of "Give us credit, don't make money, and you're fine." Some include "Don't modify this mod," but I'm not planning to do that, so that's fine too.
But then there's the Creative Commons Share Alike Non-Commercial License (Treecapitator).
And the Lesser General Public License (GraveStone).
Given that the entire project is expected to have nothing to do with money/profit, not even ad revenue (at least, from/for me; I don't yet know where I'd be hosting it, but I wouldn't choose a site with a paywall, and I'm not sure about the sites having ads for their own operational costs and all), I assume that the Non-Commercial thing isn't a problem. Except that the LGPL FAQ says it might be a problem, so maybe it's incompatible with the LGPL to begin with.
And I hope to kinda shove this thing out the door, with as many user rights as I can hand over (rehost, redistribute, modify which mods are in the pack, fix bugs, whatever), and claim from the get-go that I am not in a position to do any troubleshooting or maintenance. Mod Pack as-is, do what you will with it.
But then, also, that Share Alike thing is making me wonder. Because I can't create new rights pertaining to the mods I'm using (borrowing?), and convey them to the people who download my mod pack. Like, just because the creator of a given mod is okay with it being used in a mod pack doesn't mean that I can license it under a license that passes forward rights that the mod creator didn't intend.
And, the LGPL might require some copyleft provisions that I am not free to provide for the entire mod pack.
So, can anyone walk me through this, and help me understand what I'm doing here? Do I have to drop the LGPL pieces out of the pack, and just suggest that people add them separately? Do I have to drop the CC-SA-NC-BY thing out of the pack, and suggest that people add it separately? Is there some other step I have to take? If I include both, what sort of license or details do I need to also include, in order for this to be kosher for everyone involved?
An “aggregate” consists of a number of separate programs, distributed together on the same CD-ROM or other media. The GPL permits you to create and distribute an aggregate, even when the licenses of the other software are nonfree or GPL-incompatible. The only condition is that you cannot release the aggregate under a license that prohibits users from exercising rights that each program's individual license would grant them.
So the fact that these are a group of mods that haven't been physically edited into one single program, that should be enough? I'm still hesitant, but it's looking up.
It's frustrating because it feels like these licenses were created to make things easier for creators to collaborate, but every time one of them shows up it feels like it just makes things harder :\
My YouTube channel is currently on hiatus, but I hope to get back to it at some point. Content is fairly random, but can be enjoyable, and is mostly game footage (mostly random Minecraft clips) from my nephews and me. Most popular MC vid so far is the one Vechs laughed at on Twitter!
The Meaning of Life, the Universe, and Everything.
Join Date:
6/6/2020
Posts:
60
Minecraft:
Nlghtwing
Discord:
Endery#6932
Member Details
With both LGPL and CC you're free to share/distribute the mod
It's a problem when mods use some licence that doesn't allow that (which they like to do) or just don't specify a licence, leaving you wondering what it might be.
As long as You:
A. Don't make any profit (e.g. just put it on curseforge for everyone to download)
So... it sounds to me like, if I don't alter any of the mods themselves (which I can't do, as I have no skill in Java), but only package them together and alter the config files, then I can bundle up things with different licenses, and each mod still exists under its individual license, as opposed to me trying to find a license that accounts for all the sub-licenses. So long as each individual mod is okay with Attribution + Redistribution, the two qualities I need, and as long as I don't seek profit in any form, since some of the mods stipulate Non-Commercial as well.
Did I get that straight?
At this point, having briefly looked into CurseForge and noting that it does account for some amount of mod files not hosted on CurseForge directly, it feels like I should be able to make most or possibly all of my mod pack for that distribution point, and let them handle the rest of the details. Will this suit my desire to specify that I'm not sticking around to do troubleshooting or maintenance, specify that anyone can make a variation of my mod pack and I don't mind (so long as they're clear that it has no direct connection to me), and shove it out the door?
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
My YouTube channel is currently on hiatus, but I hope to get back to it at some point. Content is fairly random, but can be enjoyable, and is mostly game footage (mostly random Minecraft clips) from my nephews and me. Most popular MC vid so far is the one Vechs laughed at on Twitter!
So... it sounds to me like, if I don't alter any of the mods themselves (which I can't do, as I have no skill in Java), but only package them together and alter the config files, then I can bundle up things with different licenses, and each mod still exists under its individual license, as opposed to me trying to find a license that accounts for all the sub-licenses. So long as each individual mod is okay with Attribution + Redistribution, the two qualities I need, and as long as I don't seek profit in any form, since some of the mods stipulate Non-Commercial as well.
Did I get that straight?
At this point, having briefly looked into CurseForge and noting that it does account for some amount of mod files not hosted on CurseForge directly, it feels like I should be able to make most or possibly all of my mod pack for that distribution point, and let them handle the rest of the details. Will this suit my desire to specify that I'm not sticking around to do troubleshooting or maintenance, specify that anyone can make a variation of my mod pack and I don't mind (so long as they're clear that it has no direct connection to me), and shove it out the door?
Almost yes, except for you have to put a few thing in your terms of use (which mod authors not always, but oftenly ask for):
a. You cannot extract specific mods from the modpack.
and b. You cannot re-host and re-make the pack
It's not something all mod authors require, but it pops up, and will do you a lot of good in the future, as if your pack gets popular, people are going to make ripoffs, port the pack to other versions under the same name, extract mods from it if the original mod gets deleted by the author and rehost them on third party sides, modify the pack in all ways, place ads and adfly links and then you're going to be mad. So yeah
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
# Team 1.7.10
Do not ask me to switch to newer versions. I will not. Many mods did not update and never plan to, and newer versions just lost the charm.
The following mods have never got to 1.12/1.15:
- Witchery
- Mariculture
- Flaxbeard's Steam Power
- Cogs of the machine
- Cave Control
- Many Many more I can't play without, those are just off the top of my head
The following mods have been completely ruined in new versions:
It seems to me that "extract a specific mod from the mod pack" is fine behavior for your own personal, private usage. If there's no normal way to recover a missing mod, this is one way to get it. I see no problem with that, and I think that most mod creators would be glad that the mod is getting used even after they've disappeared from the community. (There would be some who wanted the mod taken down for good, but I see those as a rarity, and since we're talking a 1.7.10 pack, the amount of time that has passed since the creation of the mods gives me more confidence for this assessment.)
Extracting a mod from the mod pack, and then reposting that mod, that's wrong because of the reposting, not the extracting. You're not allowed to repost individual mods; it goes against the permissions of several mods, and is generally, I think, an accepted standard limitation (only the original author gets to post the mod, unless they specifically state that others can do so).
Trying to keep people from posting ripoffs... hmm. I suppose I'll put some line to the effect of:
If you post a modified version of this pack, you must remove my name (Arkylie) from the title, along with the term "Woodlost". In the description, you may indicate that it is a version of my pack, if you (a) make it clear that it is Unofficial and (b) link back to this page, so people who want the original pack can easily find it.
I want people to be able to make variations, most notably for the following reasons:
To update to a different version of Minecraft
To fix bugs that I'm not gonna bother fixing
To fine-tune the config files to work together in a better fashion
To improve the overall experience by trying to get closer to my vision (which might involve adding or subtracting mods)
I understand that some people may make knock-off variations that don't have any of these things in mind, that make it worse instead of better, and/or that add in a bunch of content that I hate (modern or high-tech additions), but I'm a big fan of remix culture and have no problem with people extending the work of others. That seems quite natural to me. (Plus, I don't think it's possible to stop the outright plagiarists, not without expending far more effort than I'm willing to expend.)
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
My YouTube channel is currently on hiatus, but I hope to get back to it at some point. Content is fairly random, but can be enjoyable, and is mostly game footage (mostly random Minecraft clips) from my nephews and me. Most popular MC vid so far is the one Vechs laughed at on Twitter!
It seems to me that "extract a specific mod from the mod pack" is fine behavior for your own personal, private usage. If there's no normal way to recover a missing mod, this is one way to get it. I see no problem with that, and I think that most mod creators would be glad that the mod is getting used even after they've disappeared from the community. (There would be some who wanted the mod taken down for good, but I see those as a rarity, and since we're talking a 1.7.10 pack, the amount of time that has passed since the creation of the mods gives me more confidence for this assessment.)
Extracting a mod from the mod pack, and then reposting that mod, that's wrong because of the reposting, not the extracting. You're not allowed to repost individual mods; it goes against the permissions of several mods, and is generally, I think, an accepted standard limitation (only the original author gets to post the mod, unless they specifically state that others can do so).
Trying to keep people from posting ripoffs... hmm. I suppose I'll put some line to the effect of:
I want people to be able to make variations, most notably for the following reasons:
To update to a different version of Minecraft
To fix bugs that I'm not gonna bother fixing
To fine-tune the config files to work together in a better fashion
To improve the overall experience by trying to get closer to my vision (which might involve adding or subtracting mods)
I understand that some people may make knock-off variations that don't have any of these things in mind, that make it worse instead of better, and/or that add in a bunch of content that I hate (modern or high-tech additions), but I'm a big fan of remix culture and have no problem with people extending the work of others. That seems quite natural to me. (Plus, I don't think it's possible to stop the outright plagiarists, not without expending far more effort than I'm willing to expend.)
All I can say, you're quite right. Good luck with your modpack, PM me with it when you're done, you seem to be putting in a lot of effort into it so I'm curious to see what comes out of it : D
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
# Team 1.7.10
Do not ask me to switch to newer versions. I will not. Many mods did not update and never plan to, and newer versions just lost the charm.
The following mods have never got to 1.12/1.15:
- Witchery
- Mariculture
- Flaxbeard's Steam Power
- Cogs of the machine
- Cave Control
- Many Many more I can't play without, those are just off the top of my head
The following mods have been completely ruined in new versions:
If I get far enough to have it go public, I'll let you know
Don't suppose you'd care to tweak a bunch of configs to make Biomes o' Plenty and Metallurgy work together to my specifications? That's one of the biggest time-chore kinda things I'm looking at, and I think it's one of the parts that brought me up short the last time I tried this.
Basically, I want to be able to predict the likely ores based on the surface biome. I know that's not exactly based on real-world geology, but since I'm more of a surface-dweller than a miner, I'd like to be able to browse the surface until I run across certain biomes, go "Oh yay, now I can find silver!" and start digging in that area. I would like some random ores (so it's not entirely predictable), and some of the low-level ores should be surface-available in most biomes, but like the more magical ores should be in magic-type biomes, just for starters. (At some point, I had a list, but I could recreate it even if I can't find it.)
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
My YouTube channel is currently on hiatus, but I hope to get back to it at some point. Content is fairly random, but can be enjoyable, and is mostly game footage (mostly random Minecraft clips) from my nephews and me. Most popular MC vid so far is the one Vechs laughed at on Twitter!
If I get far enough to have it go public, I'll let you know
Don't suppose you'd care to tweak a bunch of configs to make Biomes o' Plenty and Metallurgy work together to my specifications? That's one of the biggest time-chore kinda things I'm looking at, and I think it's one of the parts that brought me up short the last time I tried this.
Basically, I want to be able to predict the likely ores based on the surface biome. I know that's not exactly based on real-world geology, but since I'm more of a surface-dweller than a miner, I'd like to be able to browse the surface until I run across certain biomes, go "Oh yay, now I can find silver!" and start digging in that area. I would like some random ores (so it's not entirely predictable), and some of the low-level ores should be surface-available in most biomes, but like the more magical ores should be in magic-type biomes, just for starters. (At some point, I had a list, but I could recreate it even if I can't find it.)
Sorry, I don't really know how to do that. (probably could try but seems like a lot of work)
Yeah, it was a long shot. (Though your interest in 1.7.10 and the modding scene made it slightly less of a long shot, since you're probably not a newbie.) No worries.
What I have to do, basically, is read up on the config options enough to understand the basics that I mostly understood like five years ago, determine which ores I want in which biomes, determine which formations I want (small veins? large veins? big pockets? vertical streaks? surface-level scattering? etc.), and then match the numbers for a handful of settings per biome. For each of BoP's biomes, of which there are a lot.
It's "a lot of work" in terms of repeated process and pinning down the numbers, and I don't even recall how to test to see if I got the numbers right. But it's not that big a deal, I just gotta get to the point where I do it.
I miss the days when I had groups flocking around me and following my lead. Even if we never got anywhere particularly noteworthy, it was fun, and less work for me in a lot of ways. But unlike creating mods (which I couldn't do, as I have no skill in Java), building this mod pack is a task I can probably do on my own, it'll just take a while.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
My YouTube channel is currently on hiatus, but I hope to get back to it at some point. Content is fairly random, but can be enjoyable, and is mostly game footage (mostly random Minecraft clips) from my nephews and me. Most popular MC vid so far is the one Vechs laughed at on Twitter!
Yeah, it was a long shot. (Though your interest in 1.7.10 and the modding scene made it slightly less of a long shot, since you're probably not a newbie.) No worries.
What I have to do, basically, is read up on the config options enough to understand the basics that I mostly understood like five years ago, determine which ores I want in which biomes, determine which formations I want (small veins? large veins? big pockets? vertical streaks? surface-level scattering? etc.), and then match the numbers for a handful of settings per biome. For each of BoP's biomes, of which there are a lot.
It's "a lot of work" in terms of repeated process and pinning down the numbers, and I don't even recall how to test to see if I got the numbers right. But it's not that big a deal, I just gotta get to the point where I do it.
I miss the days when I had groups flocking around me and following my lead. Even if we never got anywhere particularly noteworthy, it was fun, and less work for me in a lot of ways. But unlike creating mods (which I couldn't do, as I have no skill in Java), building this mod pack is a task I can probably do on my own, it'll just take a while.
Yup. I googled up a bit on how to achieve what you'd want, and it's.. well.. pretty much what you just said. A lot of numbers.
Pretty much, an issue is - how do you know that I'd accurately represent your vision of the pack? I could do something that seems right to me but seems wrong to you, you know. I would've tried to help but I'm creating a modded server rn, and that's a lot of work, all with the modpack, configs, fixing dupes, bugs, crashes, plugins, website, hosting, etc It's a lot of work and it takes up all my time.. If you could try to help with the crash I posted in this section, I would be really grateful
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
# Team 1.7.10
Do not ask me to switch to newer versions. I will not. Many mods did not update and never plan to, and newer versions just lost the charm.
The following mods have never got to 1.12/1.15:
- Witchery
- Mariculture
- Flaxbeard's Steam Power
- Cogs of the machine
- Cave Control
- Many Many more I can't play without, those are just off the top of my head
The following mods have been completely ruined in new versions:
Glad you solved the crash, because I have no clue when it comes to the more complicated mods. My response to crashes is often to just cut the mods in half, figure out which half is crashing, continue doing so until I find the mod that's crashing, then decide whether I want that mod enough to take more effort at keeping it in, or just to drop it off the face of the earth for this build. (I can get a little more intuitive about which mods might be crashing, and don't have to go with full "anything could be suspect" mode anymore, but it's still a lot of guesswork.)
The way I always worked with helpers in the past was, I'd figure out what I wanted, and do my best to describe it, and they'd figure out the code or the configs to accomplish it. Then I'd look over what they'd done, figure out if it was close enough to what I wanted or if I needed to describe it more carefully, and then we'd either give it another go, tweak it, or go "Yup, that's good enough." And getting a decent base config that hits close to what I'm after would enable me to tweak it on my own with far less effort than starting from scratch.
But that's moot, as you're busy, which is perfectly understandable and hardly uncommon. Just because I have a problem (or, in this case, a desire to do things in an easier manner) doesn't mean that anyone else has a duty to help me. I toss out requests and see if anyone is interested, and if no one is interested and/or capable of meeting my request, that's not a big deal. I appreciate the thought, though
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
My YouTube channel is currently on hiatus, but I hope to get back to it at some point. Content is fairly random, but can be enjoyable, and is mostly game footage (mostly random Minecraft clips) from my nephews and me. Most popular MC vid so far is the one Vechs laughed at on Twitter!
Anyone here familiar with how the various license types interact, when it comes to publishing a mod pack? I'm concerned about taking a mod with X license and putting it in a mod with Y license where Y license might imply certain rights or restrictions that X license doesn't allow for.
Specifically:
Most of the mods I'm including have some variation of "Give us credit, don't make money, and you're fine." Some include "Don't modify this mod," but I'm not planning to do that, so that's fine too.
But then there's the Creative Commons Share Alike Non-Commercial License (Treecapitator).
And the Lesser General Public License (GraveStone).
Given that the entire project is expected to have nothing to do with money/profit, not even ad revenue (at least, from/for me; I don't yet know where I'd be hosting it, but I wouldn't choose a site with a paywall, and I'm not sure about the sites having ads for their own operational costs and all), I assume that the Non-Commercial thing isn't a problem. Except that the LGPL FAQ says it might be a problem, so maybe it's incompatible with the LGPL to begin with.
And I hope to kinda shove this thing out the door, with as many user rights as I can hand over (rehost, redistribute, modify which mods are in the pack, fix bugs, whatever), and claim from the get-go that I am not in a position to do any troubleshooting or maintenance. Mod Pack as-is, do what you will with it.
But then, also, that Share Alike thing is making me wonder. Because I can't create new rights pertaining to the mods I'm using (borrowing?), and convey them to the people who download my mod pack. Like, just because the creator of a given mod is okay with it being used in a mod pack doesn't mean that I can license it under a license that passes forward rights that the mod creator didn't intend.
And, the LGPL might require some copyleft provisions that I am not free to provide for the entire mod pack.
So, can anyone walk me through this, and help me understand what I'm doing here? Do I have to drop the LGPL pieces out of the pack, and just suggest that people add them separately? Do I have to drop the CC-SA-NC-BY thing out of the pack, and suggest that people add it separately? Is there some other step I have to take? If I include both, what sort of license or details do I need to also include, in order for this to be kosher for everyone involved?
ETA: Miiiiight have found it; not entirely sure: https://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl-faq.en.html#MereAggregation
So the fact that these are a group of mods that haven't been physically edited into one single program, that should be enough? I'm still hesitant, but it's looking up.
It's frustrating because it feels like these licenses were created to make things easier for creators to collaborate, but every time one of them shows up it feels like it just makes things harder :\
My YouTube channel is currently on hiatus, but I hope to get back to it at some point. Content is fairly random, but can be enjoyable, and is mostly game footage (mostly random Minecraft clips) from my nephews and me. Most popular MC vid so far is the one Vechs laughed at on Twitter!
With both LGPL and CC you're free to share/distribute the mod
It's a problem when mods use some licence that doesn't allow that (which they like to do) or just don't specify a licence, leaving you wondering what it might be.
As long as You:
A. Don't make any profit (e.g. just put it on curseforge for everyone to download)
B. Leave the proper credits (like so)
C. If you modify a mod and licence it, licence it under the same licence as the original mod
D. (this one is just me, not specified by the licences) leave a contact so people can contact you if they wish to remove their mod from your modpack
I say you're going to be fine.
NOT TO CONFUSE LGPL WITH GPL, which you CANNOT use as you modpack is not free software. (unless all of the mods are, which I doubt)
edit: for reference:
https://tldrlegal.com/license/gnu-lesser-general-public-license-v3-(lgpl-3)
https://tldrlegal.com/license/creative-commons-attribution-sharealike-4.0-international-(cc-by-sa-4.0)
# Team 1.7.10
Do not ask me to switch to newer versions. I will not. Many mods did not update and never plan to, and newer versions just lost the charm.
The following mods have never got to 1.12/1.15:
- Many Many more I can't play without, those are just off the top of my head
The following mods have been completely ruined in new versions:
So... it sounds to me like, if I don't alter any of the mods themselves (which I can't do, as I have no skill in Java), but only package them together and alter the config files, then I can bundle up things with different licenses, and each mod still exists under its individual license, as opposed to me trying to find a license that accounts for all the sub-licenses. So long as each individual mod is okay with Attribution + Redistribution, the two qualities I need, and as long as I don't seek profit in any form, since some of the mods stipulate Non-Commercial as well.
Did I get that straight?
At this point, having briefly looked into CurseForge and noting that it does account for some amount of mod files not hosted on CurseForge directly, it feels like I should be able to make most or possibly all of my mod pack for that distribution point, and let them handle the rest of the details. Will this suit my desire to specify that I'm not sticking around to do troubleshooting or maintenance, specify that anyone can make a variation of my mod pack and I don't mind (so long as they're clear that it has no direct connection to me), and shove it out the door?
My YouTube channel is currently on hiatus, but I hope to get back to it at some point. Content is fairly random, but can be enjoyable, and is mostly game footage (mostly random Minecraft clips) from my nephews and me. Most popular MC vid so far is the one Vechs laughed at on Twitter!
Almost yes, except for you have to put a few thing in your terms of use (which mod authors not always, but oftenly ask for):
a. You cannot extract specific mods from the modpack.
and b. You cannot re-host and re-make the pack
It's not something all mod authors require, but it pops up, and will do you a lot of good in the future, as if your pack gets popular, people are going to make ripoffs, port the pack to other versions under the same name, extract mods from it if the original mod gets deleted by the author and rehost them on third party sides, modify the pack in all ways, place ads and adfly links and then you're going to be mad. So yeah
# Team 1.7.10
Do not ask me to switch to newer versions. I will not. Many mods did not update and never plan to, and newer versions just lost the charm.
The following mods have never got to 1.12/1.15:
- Many Many more I can't play without, those are just off the top of my head
The following mods have been completely ruined in new versions:
Hmm.
It seems to me that "extract a specific mod from the mod pack" is fine behavior for your own personal, private usage. If there's no normal way to recover a missing mod, this is one way to get it. I see no problem with that, and I think that most mod creators would be glad that the mod is getting used even after they've disappeared from the community. (There would be some who wanted the mod taken down for good, but I see those as a rarity, and since we're talking a 1.7.10 pack, the amount of time that has passed since the creation of the mods gives me more confidence for this assessment.)
Extracting a mod from the mod pack, and then reposting that mod, that's wrong because of the reposting, not the extracting. You're not allowed to repost individual mods; it goes against the permissions of several mods, and is generally, I think, an accepted standard limitation (only the original author gets to post the mod, unless they specifically state that others can do so).
Trying to keep people from posting ripoffs... hmm. I suppose I'll put some line to the effect of:
I want people to be able to make variations, most notably for the following reasons:
I understand that some people may make knock-off variations that don't have any of these things in mind, that make it worse instead of better, and/or that add in a bunch of content that I hate (modern or high-tech additions), but I'm a big fan of remix culture and have no problem with people extending the work of others. That seems quite natural to me. (Plus, I don't think it's possible to stop the outright plagiarists, not without expending far more effort than I'm willing to expend.)
My YouTube channel is currently on hiatus, but I hope to get back to it at some point. Content is fairly random, but can be enjoyable, and is mostly game footage (mostly random Minecraft clips) from my nephews and me. Most popular MC vid so far is the one Vechs laughed at on Twitter!
All I can say, you're quite right. Good luck with your modpack, PM me with it when you're done, you seem to be putting in a lot of effort into it so I'm curious to see what comes out of it : D
# Team 1.7.10
Do not ask me to switch to newer versions. I will not. Many mods did not update and never plan to, and newer versions just lost the charm.
The following mods have never got to 1.12/1.15:
- Many Many more I can't play without, those are just off the top of my head
The following mods have been completely ruined in new versions:
If I get far enough to have it go public, I'll let you know
Don't suppose you'd care to tweak a bunch of configs to make Biomes o' Plenty and Metallurgy work together to my specifications? That's one of the biggest time-chore kinda things I'm looking at, and I think it's one of the parts that brought me up short the last time I tried this.
Basically, I want to be able to predict the likely ores based on the surface biome. I know that's not exactly based on real-world geology, but since I'm more of a surface-dweller than a miner, I'd like to be able to browse the surface until I run across certain biomes, go "Oh yay, now I can find silver!" and start digging in that area. I would like some random ores (so it's not entirely predictable), and some of the low-level ores should be surface-available in most biomes, but like the more magical ores should be in magic-type biomes, just for starters. (At some point, I had a list, but I could recreate it even if I can't find it.)
My YouTube channel is currently on hiatus, but I hope to get back to it at some point. Content is fairly random, but can be enjoyable, and is mostly game footage (mostly random Minecraft clips) from my nephews and me. Most popular MC vid so far is the one Vechs laughed at on Twitter!
Sorry, I don't really know how to do that. (probably could try but seems like a lot of work)
# Team 1.7.10
Do not ask me to switch to newer versions. I will not. Many mods did not update and never plan to, and newer versions just lost the charm.
The following mods have never got to 1.12/1.15:
- Many Many more I can't play without, those are just off the top of my head
The following mods have been completely ruined in new versions:
Yeah, it was a long shot. (Though your interest in 1.7.10 and the modding scene made it slightly less of a long shot, since you're probably not a newbie.) No worries.
What I have to do, basically, is read up on the config options enough to understand the basics that I mostly understood like five years ago, determine which ores I want in which biomes, determine which formations I want (small veins? large veins? big pockets? vertical streaks? surface-level scattering? etc.), and then match the numbers for a handful of settings per biome. For each of BoP's biomes, of which there are a lot.
It's "a lot of work" in terms of repeated process and pinning down the numbers, and I don't even recall how to test to see if I got the numbers right. But it's not that big a deal, I just gotta get to the point where I do it.
I miss the days when I had groups flocking around me and following my lead. Even if we never got anywhere particularly noteworthy, it was fun, and less work for me in a lot of ways. But unlike creating mods (which I couldn't do, as I have no skill in Java), building this mod pack is a task I can probably do on my own, it'll just take a while.
My YouTube channel is currently on hiatus, but I hope to get back to it at some point. Content is fairly random, but can be enjoyable, and is mostly game footage (mostly random Minecraft clips) from my nephews and me. Most popular MC vid so far is the one Vechs laughed at on Twitter!
Yup. I googled up a bit on how to achieve what you'd want, and it's.. well.. pretty much what you just said. A lot of numbers.
Pretty much, an issue is - how do you know that I'd accurately represent your vision of the pack? I could do something that seems right to me but seems wrong to you, you know. I would've tried to help but I'm creating a modded server rn, and that's a lot of work, all with the modpack, configs, fixing dupes, bugs, crashes, plugins, website, hosting, etc It's a lot of work and it takes up all my time.. If you could try to help with the crash I posted in this section, I would be really grateful
# Team 1.7.10
Do not ask me to switch to newer versions. I will not. Many mods did not update and never plan to, and newer versions just lost the charm.
The following mods have never got to 1.12/1.15:
- Many Many more I can't play without, those are just off the top of my head
The following mods have been completely ruined in new versions:
Glad you solved the crash, because I have no clue when it comes to the more complicated mods. My response to crashes is often to just cut the mods in half, figure out which half is crashing, continue doing so until I find the mod that's crashing, then decide whether I want that mod enough to take more effort at keeping it in, or just to drop it off the face of the earth for this build. (I can get a little more intuitive about which mods might be crashing, and don't have to go with full "anything could be suspect" mode anymore, but it's still a lot of guesswork.)
The way I always worked with helpers in the past was, I'd figure out what I wanted, and do my best to describe it, and they'd figure out the code or the configs to accomplish it. Then I'd look over what they'd done, figure out if it was close enough to what I wanted or if I needed to describe it more carefully, and then we'd either give it another go, tweak it, or go "Yup, that's good enough." And getting a decent base config that hits close to what I'm after would enable me to tweak it on my own with far less effort than starting from scratch.
But that's moot, as you're busy, which is perfectly understandable and hardly uncommon. Just because I have a problem (or, in this case, a desire to do things in an easier manner) doesn't mean that anyone else has a duty to help me. I toss out requests and see if anyone is interested, and if no one is interested and/or capable of meeting my request, that's not a big deal. I appreciate the thought, though
My YouTube channel is currently on hiatus, but I hope to get back to it at some point. Content is fairly random, but can be enjoyable, and is mostly game footage (mostly random Minecraft clips) from my nephews and me. Most popular MC vid so far is the one Vechs laughed at on Twitter!