I honestly believe the default, should consist only of nodes, etc. related to world creation/mapgen. (this includes 'ore_in stone', water and lava. The only exception being trees, trees could certainly be a stand alone mod, due to it's slightly higher complexity involved.rubenwardy wrote:I'm looking for a good way to improve MTG's default, as it's currently a massive obstacle to inter-game modding. Not sure how to do it cleanly without some breakages. I'd argue that some breakages will be worth it in the long run
The trees.lua is already separated, now it just needs to contain it's own textures, sounds, and schematics folders.
Then a new mod which handles all of the manufactured, _brick, _block, types
Mods such as stairs and walls, carts, etc. can be kept as is, as they are already stand alone mods (with default as a dependency because..., how can it not?)
But then, do wooden planks, and fences, etc., end up in the 'trees' mod or the new mod which handles manufactured type nodes, mentioned above?
Do other decorations fall into a deco mod? Why would they not be within the default mod, which handles all world/mapgen related items..., but then, trees is separate... : /
This would be the best way to have ties to 'default', as anything outside of those materials, would have to be a stand alone mod as well.
But it might also be even worse, and even more difficult to maintain/work on.
But splitting up things such as ores into individual mods per ore is a bit..., overkill.
Of course at the same time, there could be a stand alone 'metals' mod (but then it would need a tie into default due to the ores), unless ores were also part of that mod... and then default would actually have stand alone mods as dependencies)
So..., where is the 'win'?
And that is the most difficult part in all of this..., what to split off to where, how to remove as much dependency as possible, where is the line drawn when it comes to complicating things?
(groups) becomes another problem, how and where are they set? and why
And no matter which way it ends up, there is going to be breakage. Some are fine with this, some are not. But, in order to move forward..., 'breakage' has to be involved.
But, will that breakage actually be worth it? Or will it just bring more problems down the line...
It is very easy to say "it should be this way", when it is the way 'you' would be happy with it however..., count on more than one other person disliking the idea.
It is also much easier to say, than to actually do. Many have set off on the idea..., but I have yet to see any one of them completed. They seem to stall out over a short period of time.
And that is because..., it is not as easy as it initially seems.