Minecraft Replay Mod Forums - Will there be a version for 1.7.10

User
17 forum posts

User2761

#1

Aug 14 15, 08:13 PM | Last edited: Aug 14 15, 08:13 PM

Will there be a version for 1.7.10?

EDIT
Sorry wrong category, forget to change it :(

Beta Tester
250 forum posts

User34

#2

Aug 14 15, 08:18 PM

I'm sorry but a version for 1.7.10 isn't planned, but the mod will be updated to newer minecraft versions as soon as a compatible forge version is available.

User
17 forum posts

User2761

#3

Aug 14 15, 08:51 PM

Is there a way to get the source of it?
I'm an experienced modder and could offer to port it back 1.7.1.0, but it is a pain in the ass without sources.

Developer
1883 forum posts

At the moment there aren't any plans on releasing the source code (partially due to how messy it got within that half year of development). I'd have to discuss that with @User1 before I can give an answer to that question.

User
17 forum posts

User2761

#5

Aug 16 15, 01:52 PM

It's not about making a perfect port, but giving at least some options. Maybe we can leave the online part out, just in case :D

Developer
818 forum posts

User1

in response to User2761

#6

Aug 16 15, 01:55 PM

User2761

It's not about making a perfect port, but giving at least some options. Maybe we can leave the online part out, just in case :D

Why would you need a backport for 1.7? The Replay Mod isn't compatible with most mods anyway (and playing modded Minecraft is the only reason you'd play 1.7.10)

User
17 forum posts

User2761

in response to User1

#7

Aug 16 15, 01:58 PM

User1

User2761

It's not about making a perfect port, but giving at least some options. Maybe we can leave the online part out, just in case :D

Why would you need a backport for 1.7? The Replay Mod isn't compatible with most mods anyway (and playing modded Minecraft is the only reason you'd play 1.7.10)

That's kinda true, but this mod will become very popular and modders will (if they can) add support for it.

User
17 forum posts

User2761

#8

Aug 17 15, 05:00 PM

So the answer is? It doesn't hurt anyone and i really need this mod for 1.7.10 :D

Developer
1883 forum posts

User10

in response to User2761

#9

Aug 17 15, 05:03 PM

User2761

So the answer is? It doesn't hurt anyone and i really need this mod for 1.7.10 :D

Which part exactly and why?

Developer
1883 forum posts

User10

in response to User2761

Aug 17 15, 05:04 PM

It's not about making a perfect port, but giving at least some options. Maybe we can leave the online part out, just in case :D

Why would you need a backport for 1.7? The Replay Mod isn't compatible with most mods anyway (and playing modded Minecraft is the only reason you'd play 1.7.10)

That's kinda true, but this mod will become very popular and modders will (if they can) add support for it.

By the time other modders add support, they also update their own mods to 1.8 (if not 1.9).

User
17 forum posts

User2761

in response to User10

Aug 17 15, 05:07 PM

It's not about making a perfect port, but giving at least some options. Maybe we can leave the online part out, just in case :D

Why would you need a backport for 1.7? The Replay Mod isn't compatible with most mods anyway (and playing modded Minecraft is the only reason you'd play 1.7.10)

That's kinda true, but this mod will become very popular and modders will (if they can) add support for it.

By the time other modders add support, they also update their own mods to 1.8 (if not 1.9).

Yes of course, but i need it very soon and the mods i'm using wont update to 1.8, so i would have to wait until 1.9 is out and until they updated. If i port the replay mod to 1.7.10 i could solve all these problems and i wouldn't depend on waiting for other modders to update.

User
17 forum posts

User2761

#12

Aug 18 15, 11:19 AM

Everytime you stop replying :D
Is there a real problem in giving me the source?

Developer
1883 forum posts

User10

in response to User2761

#13

Aug 18 15, 11:29 AM | Last edited: Aug 18 15, 11:39 AM

User2761

Everytime you stop replying :D
Is there a real problem in giving me the source?

You did not yet answer my question so I waited for an answer.
There are currently three (more or less important problems):
1. The source is kind of messy (but that's more of a problem for you than for us)
2. We don't know you nor have we decided on a license for the source code and I'm unsure about how I feel giving quickly licensed code to strangers
3. We don't want to deal with people reporting bugs for a 1.7.10 version we didn't even create
4. I really dislike how you put your '{' in a separate line (jk, that's not really a problem)

In addition, CrushedPixel is currently on vacation and cannot respond quickly

// Edit // Just wanted to say that I'm fine with you decompiling the code and porting that back to 1.7.10 as long as you don't distribute it.

User
17 forum posts

User2761

in response to User10

#14

Aug 18 15, 11:45 AM | Last edited: Aug 18 15, 11:48 AM

User10

User2761

Everytime you stop replying :D
Is there a real problem in giving me the source?

You did not yet answer my question so I waited for an answer.
There are currently three (more or less important problems):
1. The source is kind of messy (but that's more of a problem for you than for us)
2. We don't know you nor have we decided on a license for the source code and I'm unsure about how I feel giving quickly licensed code to strangers
3. We don't want to deal with people reporting bugs for a 1.7.10 version we didn't even create
4. I really dislike how you put your '{' in a separate line (jk, that's not really a problem)

In addition, CrushedPixel is currently on vacation and cannot respond quickly

// Edit // Just wanted to say that I'm fine with you decompiling the code and porting that back to 1.7.10 as long as you don't distribute it.

:D ok
1. Yes it is my problem
2+3. Everybody could get your source code using one little program (jd-gui http://jd.benow.ca/). Java isn't even near to be save.
I'm not aiming at releasing anything about it. I wouldn't have a problem if it's only in private use. So there will be no bug reports at all if you don't want to.

4.You don't have to care about 1.7.10 source code at all :D

Yes i'm stranger (for you at least).
A few of my projects:
ItemPhysic
RandomAdditions
LittleTiles
The Stranded Man
My Website (not finished)
Why is this reply box not resizable?

Developer
1883 forum posts

User10

in response to User2761

#15

Aug 18 15, 11:52 AM

Spoiler: Quote

Yes, I'm fully aware of how java bytecode works. I wasn't so much talking about the source code itself but the right to distribute it/the jar compiled from it.
Therefore I suggest you to use a decompiler to get yourself the source of the mod.
You won't have a lot to gain by using the original source of the mod. It is mostly uncommented.
As long as you do this for your private use and do not distribute it, I'm fine with it.

User
17 forum posts

User2761

#16

Aug 18 15, 11:56 AM | Last edited: Aug 18 15, 11:56 AM

The source code isn't linked to minecraft. I would have to look up every single call to forge/minecraft and change the names :(
Like i said before: 'it would be the pain in the as'.

Developer
1883 forum posts

User10

in response to User2761

#17

Aug 18 15, 12:08 PM | Last edited: Aug 18 15, 12:08 PM

User2761

The source code isn't linked to minecraft. I would have to look up every single call to forge/minecraft and change the names :(
Like i said before: 'it would be the pain in the as'.

You mean remapping the jar from srg names to mcp names?
I'm pretty sure there's a tool for doing that.

// Edit // Found one.

User
17 forum posts

User2761

in response to User10

#18

Aug 18 15, 12:20 PM

User10

User2761

The source code isn't linked to minecraft. I would have to look up every single call to forge/minecraft and change the names :(
Like i said before: 'it would be the pain in the as'.

You mean remapping the jar from srg names to mcp names?
I'm pretty sure there's a tool for doing that.

// Edit // Found one.

Oh, that's seems handy :D
Thank you
i will reply to this topic ones there is something done.

User
17 forum posts

User2761

#19

Sep 09 15, 11:42 AM

Sorry that i bother you again, but things are not going well.
I realized some new problems. The decompiler isn't able to decompile your mod without breaking things.
You have used some apis like spongepowerd/spacehq etc. and every single one of them is broken (causing about 1000 errors each).
Things like unassigned fields "public static myobject myfield = " and many other errors. I'm not able to fix them, these errors are out of the minecraft context and shouldn't appear.

I don't see any possibility to port this mod back to 1.7.10 without having the original source.
It's your choice of course :D and i won't bother you again if you don't want to.

Developer
818 forum posts

User1

#20

Sep 09 15, 08:28 PM

To give you my honest opinion, I don't think that it's possible to simply backport this mod to 1.7.10.
This is because we have used many 1.8 specific Minecraft features for which you won't find a replacement in 1.7.10. Also, you'd need to find 1.7.10 versions for MCProtocolLib (the spacehq library), backport Johni's ReplayStudio API and much more...

It's completely unrealistic to try and do this without any knowledge about our code, and we are not planning to backport it to 1.7.10 ourselves.

User
17 forum posts

User2761

#21

Sep 09 15, 09:32 PM

Yes, it's not easy i can imagine.
It's hard to tell if i'm able to port this mod, but i think it's worth a try.
Maybe you could help me a little bit getting started and explain some structures of your mod, but of course only if you want to.
I can completely understand why you don't want to backport to 1.7.10 yourself, but maybe you could invest a small amount of time for it :D
I don't like to bother people, but there are really a lot of people waiting for a 1.7.10 port.

Developer
1883 forum posts

User10

in response to User2761

#22

Sep 13 15, 08:45 AM

User2761

Sorry that i bother you again, but things are not going well.
I realized some new problems. The decompiler isn't able to decompile your mod without breaking things.
You have used some apis like spongepowerd/spacehq etc. and every single one of them is broken (causing about 1000 errors each).
Things like unassigned fields "public static myobject myfield = " and many other errors. I'm not able to fix them, these errors are out of the minecraft context and shouldn't appear.

I don't see any possibility to port this mod back to 1.7.10 without having the original source.
It's your choice of course :D and i won't bother you again if you don't want to.

If you're getting unassigned fields or other syntax errors, then you should get a better decompiler.
I'd also like to inform you that there might not be a version of the SpongePowered Mixins for 1.7 forge (not entirely sure though), so expect to use lots of ASM.
You won't be needing MCProtocolLib (spacehq) if you're not planing on back-porting the Replay Editor.

User
17 forum posts

User2761

#23

Sep 13 15, 03:52 PM

I'm using the jd-gui decompiler, could you give me an example of a better one?

I know that i'm a stranger and you don't what to give your source code to strangers.
Maybe we could arrange a "meeting" on teamspeak?