I’ve been experimenting with this new wiki format a bit, trying to figure things out (my experience with wikis so far was pretty much non-existent). The plan for today was to update my module’s page, but I notice it’s not possible for me to delete old versions of my files from the archive. Is there a way to do this?
It’s my general preference to only keep current versions of my stuff publically available in any way or form. Also, I’d rather have the option to completely remove my files should I see the need to do so.
If the current site’s engine does not allow such actions, I’d rather move the module somewhere else. Should that be the case, can I opt to have its page and all associated files deleted? (Note: just give me a few days to sort things out, copy instructions etc.)
I’ve been experimenting with this new wiki format a bit, trying to
figure things out (my experience with wikis so far was pretty much
non-existent). The plan for today was to update my module’s page, but I
notice it’s not possible for me to delete old versions of my files from
the archive. Is there a way to do this?
You can definitely remove the links from the module page. Actually
deleting the files is something which you’d need a wiki admin to
do for you; also, see below.
It’s my general preference to only keep current versions of my stuff
publically available in any way or form. Also, I’d rather have the
option to completely remove my files should I see the need to do so.
If the current site’s engine does not allow such actions, I’d rather
move the module somewhere else. Should that be the case, can I opt to
have its page and all associated files deleted? (Note: just give me a
few days to sort things out, copy instructions etc.)
It is possible to delete the module files and the page, but I’d like
to understand why you’d want to do that.
First, regarding the module page: The module page is a natural place to
put links to your module if you’re hosting it somewhere else. If you have
no module page at all, then it will be harder for people to find your
module.
Second, regarding old module versions: Provided that filenames contain a
recognizable version number, I think it’s unfriendly toward the user to
hide versions of a file older than the current one. It’s fine to put them
someplace less prominent, but deleting them entirely is bad practice. The
user could have many reasons for wanting an older version, as could a
subsequent module maintainer.
So, that’s my position. I’d like to understand yours; presently I don’t.
Well, that was the reason I uploaded the module here back when. People have to be directed here to download Vassal anyway.
Still, Bucket is a pretty niche tool (niche in a niche, in fact). Vassal’s website, being devoted to board games by default, is not necessarily the most natural place to look for this sort of stuff. Most people learn about Bucket directly from me or my friends. Those who need Bucket in the first place are more likely to follow our links from other places than start here. Visibility isn’t an issue, consequently.
Either way, struggling with the wiki a while back, I discovered that blanking the page effectively deletes it from module library and decided to leave it at that for now. Who should I talk to regarding the file’s removal?
Oh, boy. That’s going to be a bit complicated, I guess.
I’m not very consistent with version numbers, I’m afraid, not being a programmer. I believe I numbered the last version uploaded here incorrectly anyway (it’s only recently that I found out that internal version number in itself has no real effect on connections and saves compatibility).
I don’t expect any future maintainers. Niche in a niche, as I said. Even as far as I’m concerned myself, it’s very likely different software makes this module completely redundant for me in a few years at most.
I don’t see why any regular user would need an older version.
At one point I kept two versions available, since after major prototypes revision saves from our older campaigns effectively lost compatibility with the new version. This resulted in a lot of needless confusion among my players, despite myself always being clear which files to download.
It’s my general preference to maintain as tight control over my content as possible. I used to have more of my stuff freely available in the past and I regretted it later. I especially don’t want redundant versions floating around if I can help it (this actually caused considerable problems for me once, when some fanboy kept distributing an early contest edition of my game behind my back while I was trying to organize playtesting of the heavily revised manual).
Still, Bucket is a pretty niche tool (niche in a niche, in fact).
Vassal’s website, being devoted to board games by default, is not
necessarily the most natural place to look for this sort of stuff. Most
people learn about Bucket directly from me or my friends. Those who need
Bucket in the first place are more likely to follow our links from other
places than start here. Visibility isn’t an issue, consequently.
Visibility also matters to us developers. If we get bug reports involving
your module, we’d like to be able to find it so we can test. Having it
in a known location makes that easier.
Either way, struggling with the wiki a while back, I discovered that
blanking the page effectively deletes it from module library and decided
to leave it at that for now. Who should I talk to regarding the file’s
removal?
That would be me, but again, I ask you to reconsider.
I’m not very consistent with version numbers, I’m afraid, not being a
programmer. I believe I numbered the last version uploaded here
incorrectly anyway (it’s only recently that I found out that internal
version number in itself has no real effect on connections and saves
compatibility).
This isn’t a condition on hosting; it’s a request. We’d prefer you do it,
but it’s not mandatory.
Version numbering isn’t complex—it’s just a way of giving a
lexicographical order. a.b > c.d if a > c, or a = c and b > d.
I don’t expect any future maintainers. Niche in a niche, as I said.
Even as far as I’m concerned myself, it’s very likely different software
makes this module completely redundant for me in a few years at most.
Really? What?
I don’t see why any regular user would need an older version.
I’ve frequently wanted older versions of modules for testing purposes,
to load old saved games, to retrieve images removed or changed in later
versions. To put it in perspective: I don’t see why any regular person
would want an iPhone or enjoy Brussels sprouts, yet many seem to.
At one point I kept two versions available, since after major
prototypes revision saves from our older campaigns effectively lost
compatibility with the new version. This resulted in a lot of needless
confusion among my players, despite myself always being clear which
files to download.
The reason you give here is exactly why I feel that older version should
be available.
It’s my general preference to maintain as tight control over my
content as possible. I used to have more of my stuff freely available in
the past and I regretted it later. I especially don’t want redundant
versions floating around if I can help it (this actually caused
considerable problems for me once, when some fanboy kept distributing an
early contest edition of my game behind my back while I was trying to
organize playtesting of the heavily revised manual).
If you use proper version numbering, then the correct repsonse to such
problems is a simple one—“you should use the current version, which is
x.y.z”. The user isn’t able to verify for himself what he has if every
version has the same name.
If you want to use proper version numbering and you’re not sure how it
works, you can ask me all the questions you want about it and I’ll try
to respond promptly.
Well, I guess I’ll link the module from the wiki, once I find some spare time and energy to actually set up a proper page for it.
Version numbering is correct in the latest few versions, but that developement occurred recently, while the site was in a mess. I didn’t upload those here yet, consequently. The current version to be (temporarily) found on my blog is 1.4.8, while the version here is 1.4.5, internally labeled as 1.4 (that was before I learned some error messages with older saves and stuff can safely be ignored). Should someone need any previous version for some important reasons, they can always contact me and I’ll most likely send the file.
Regarding your final point, note that while the software world might be big on versions and numbers, but in the roll-playing world most people I know just don’t care. The majority will recognize major editions, e.g. they will know the basic difference between D&D 3.5 and 4.0, or between OWoD and NWoD, but barely any gamers keep track of every errata and stuff. That was the core of the problem I described: outside my immediate community no matter how I label versions, only a fraction of the audience will actually register that. I don’t think there’s a cure for a broken fandom mentality.
Oh, new virtual tabletops crop out every now and then. Last year custom Google Wave plugins were a fad, in fact, and currently I’m curiously observing the development of Infrno.
The basic problem is that there aren’t many solutions that are both flexible, cross-platform and free. Most lack flexibility, being optimized for D&D, or requiring non-trivial adjustments for each new ruleset - this is where Vassal excels at this point, allowing me to just put all sorts of props into a single system-agnostic toolbox module and stop worrying. The combination of both cross-platform and free is also hard to come by.
None of the available applications is my ideal online gaming tool, though Vassal and Bucket address most of my everyday gaming needs. Still, the current version of Vassal lacks a few peripheral but useful features (e.g. drawing tools, enhanced text formatting, pointer tool, picture sharing, mp3 support and such, more or less in that order). This is only natural, given that the engine was specifically designed with board games rather than roll-playing games in mind, and consequently I’m applying it outside its basic intended purpose. However, it’s to be expected that a more fitting virtual tabletop app appears sooner or later, effectively rendering Bucket of Dice obsolete.
Well, I guess I’ll link the module from the wiki, once I find some spare
time and energy to actually set up a proper page for it.
Version numbering is correct in the latest few versions, but that
developement occurred recently, while the site was in a mess. I didn’t
upload those here yet, consequently. The current version to be
(temporarily) found on my blog is 1.4.8, while the version here is
1.4.5, internally labeled as 1.4 (that was before I learned some error
messages with older saves and stuff can be safely ignored). Should
someone need any previous version for some important reasons, they can
always contact me and I’ll most likely send the file.
Regarding your final point, note that while the software world might be
big on versions and numbers, but in the roll-playing world most people I
know just don’t care. The majority will recognize major editions, e.g.
they will know the basic difference between D&D 3.5 and 4.0, or between
OWoD and NWoD, but barely any gamers keep track of every errata and
stuff. That was the core of the problem I described: outside my
immediate community no matter how I label versions, only a fraction of
the audience will actually register that. I don’t think there’s a cure
for a broken fandom mentality.
I’m not disagreeeing with you here. If you get the same result either
way, then you might as well do it the right way.
though Vassal and Bucket address most of my everyday gaming needs.
Still, the current version of Vassal lacks a few peripheral but useful
features (e.g. drawing tools, enhanced text formatting, a pointer tool,
picture sharing, mp3 support and such, more or less in that order). This
is only natural, given that the engine was specifically designed with
board games rather than roll-playing games in mind, and consequently I’m
applying it outside its basic intended purpose. However, it’s to be
expected that a more fitting virtual tabletop app appears sooner or
later, effectively making Bucket of Dice obsolete.
I wouldn’t be so sure that the thing you’re looking for isn’t a future
version of VASSAL. The drawing tools you want are already partially
written, for example.
So, it’s been over a month since my request, but I notice the files are still there. Did you receive the PM?
(And yes, I’m aware of the drawing tools being planned. I’m waiting for those eagerly. Just saying that I expect the module to become obsolete eventually, for one reason or another, as is the case with software. Since I already invested some work in the module, it would be convenient for it to remain useful for me as long as possible, obviously.)
It’s been several months since my request already, but the module in question is still there.
Do you intend to remove the file as per my request at all or not?
Well, I think your old modules page was much more user friendly and, as a bonus, more aesthetically pleasing in its simplicity. Less chaos all over the place, less irrelevant stuff to filter out when browsing module lists and pages, easy upload and easy file management, full content control for contributors. But I guess that’s just me.
Well, I think your old modules page was much more user friendly and, as
a bonus, more aesthetically pleasing in its simplicity. Less chaos all
over the place, less irrelevant stuff to filter out when browsing module
lists and pages, easy upload and easy file management, full content
control for contributors. But I guess that’s just me.
The old one was unmaintainable and insecure. I don’t agree that the old
one was aesthetically better, nor that it was easier to use—we got as
many questions about the old setup as the new one.
