Cleaning up the DLS

[paulhobbs]

No ...

I see download via FTP, which results in a 2.9 trainz-buid

Not for <kuid:124017:5013> it doesn't, as you can see from the screenshots others have posted.

And Content Manager, it usually come up with the notice: "The asset is not available on the DLS, and is obsoleted by a higher version of Trainz"

Yes, you will get that if you are using an unsupported version of Trainz and the asset really does have a later version on the DLS. Again, not the case for <kuid:124017:5013>.

Note that if you have your DLS settings set to 'Images only' you don't get a download via FTP button. Use one of the other options instead.

I grow tired of talking to people who are wearing earplugs in their ears, who are wearing blinders over their eyes, and those who refuse to acknowledge the truth that is staring them right in the face ... those who are deaf, dumb, and blind to the Truth

I know exactly how you feel.

Paul

 

[boc61]

@cascaderailroad - Apart from the word 'unbelievable' everything else you said just doesn't accord with what several people have shown you to be true. Are you suggesting we are all in some conspiracy? I can only think there is something seriously wrong with your computer or software if you see that asset as a build 2.9. The white pages DLS download page for the asset shows 2 buttons - one for Download Helper and one for FTP - yet you only see the FTP button. That might be a clue that something about your system is not quite right, but i just cannot see how that could change an internal detail like the trainz build of the asset.

 

[SailorDan]

N3V sent Peter a list of items that needed fixing and he told them Dave has better versions of the old items now , please remove them - they said no !!!!

That was the mistake. He should have uploaded a repaired version of the asset with a note included in the description referring to that better asset. That way it would have been removed from the cleanup list, it would have been repaired to his standards, and everyone using it would have been aware that they should look for that other asset instead.

It is better to work with the system, whatever you don't like about it, than to try and subvert it.

 

[NSWGR_46Class]

Peter only works in 2004 - there for he could not up load newer version - and yes we did try what you suggested. That is why he used to hand his meshs off to me I would do the configs, the scripting, the thumbnails and shadow and then release it to the DLS - we have come to a solution no more releases to the DLS.

Now you also have to remember N3V are selling the 36 class steam loco as add on content to TANE. TANE is meant to be the latest and greatest so why are they then selling a 10 year old loco with a head light that is a texture that does not even turn on or off as the best thing since sliced bread. Bit like showing someone a picture of a Concord, charging them 1st class airfare and them putting on a container ship.

That was the mistake. He should have uploaded a repaired version of the asset with a note included in the description referring to that better asset. That way it would have been removed from the cleanup list, it would have been repaired to his standards, and everyone using it would have been aware that they should look for that other asset instead.

It is better to work with the system, whatever you don't like about it, than to try and subvert it.

 

[paulhobbs]

Peter only works in 2004 - there for he could not up load newer version - and yes we did try what you suggested. That is why he used to hand his meshs off to me I would do the configs, the scripting, the thumbnails and shadow and then release it to the DLS - we have come to a solution no more releases to the DLS.

Now you also have to remember N3V are selling the 36 class steam loco as add on content to TANE. TANE is meant to be the latest and greatest so why are they then selling a 10 year old loco with a head light that is a texture that does not even turn on or off as the best thing since sliced bread. Bit like showing someone a picture of a Concord, charging them 1st class airfare and them putting on a container ship.

Back on topic the problem here is that the TRS2004 version is under Peter's kuid and the update under yours. What you should have done was to give the update to Peter to upload under his kuid. As it is the DLS has no way of knowing that the later version should obsolete the earlier one and it's not possible for one user to obsolete the assets of another for obvious reasons.

You can still fix it by having Peter upload the update and then the earlier version can be updated in everybody's copy of T:ANE.

Paul

 

[NSWGR_46Class]

We tried that but it would not allow Peter to upload content for a trainz version he did not own = my script would not work in 2004 = so it was useless to other 2004 users which Peter was not happy with - hence the need for newer version

Back on topic the problem here is that the TRS2004 version is under Peter's kuid and the update under yours. What you should have done was to give the update to Peter to upload under his kuid. As it is the DLS has no way of knowing that the later version should obsolete the earlier one and it's not possible for one user to obsolete the assets of another for obvious reasons.

You can still fix it by having Peter upload the update and then the earlier version can be updated in everybody's copy of T:ANE.

Paul

 

[johnwhelan]

Back on topic the problem here is that the TRS2004 version is under Peter's kuid and the update under yours. What you should have done was to give the update to Peter to upload under his kuid. As it is the DLS has no way of knowing that the later version should obsolete the earlier one and it's not possible for one user to obsolete the assets of another for obvious reasons.

You can still fix it by having Peter upload the update and then the earlier version can be updated in everybody's copy of T:ANE.

Paul

You still get two identical copies of the same asset cluttering the place up and that's what I'd like to avoid.

Cheerio John

 

[Dinorius_Redundicus]

No ...

I see download via FTP, which results in a 2.9 trainz-build asset

And I see Content Manager, it usually come up with the notice: "The asset is not available on the DLS, and is obsoleted by a newer (higher) version of Trainz"

Well all I can say is that there is something very wrong with your system or your eyesight because there have never been any versions of this asset with a 2.9 build as far as Content Manager is concerned. And the root asset kuid:124017:5013 apparently wasn't made or at least uploaded to the DLS because it is listed as 'unknown' by CM.

The series starts at version :1 and all are build 2.4, as you can hopefully see here in this CM search to "list all versions"...

I've looked at their configs and they all have the typical tags for a 2.4 asset, not a 2.9 asset.


.

 

[NSWGR_46Class]

Bingo and if N3V would have co operated when asked to would never have been a problem

You still get two identical copies of the same asset cluttering the place up and that's what I'd like to avoid.

Cheerio John

 

[SailorDan]

You still get two identical copies of the same asset cluttering the place up and that's what I'd like to avoid.

Better than having a faulty asset, with no indication of where to find the improved version. But the point is that they aren't identical - that's why there are two of them.

It is not necessary to get the original creator to do the upload if the asset is in the cleanup list. What I would recommend in this particular case is:

Whoever is responsible for the update should get the updated mesh etc from the original creator, create their own version (with attribution) and upload it under their own user number.

Then they claim the faulty asset in the cleanup list, repair it enough to make the fault go away (or more, according to taste), increment the version number, add a comment about where to find a better asset, and upload it.

People seem to be putting more effort into finding ways to undermine the cleanup process instead of taking advantage of it.

 

[davies_mike57]

Just a bit of added info on this topic:
Read from old forums that some of the TC3 asset GS scripting is slightly different to the Trainz 2004, 2006, 2009, 2010 scripting.
This is a fact with the steam locomotive engines kuids from TC3.
So even though the textures are converted to TGA's and configuration files are converted for Trainz 12 there could be problems with the script running 100% if the commands are not correct.
Some trainz veteran enthusiast have modified some of them in the past.

 

[johnwhelan]

Just a bit of added info on this topic:
Read from old forums that some of the TC3 asset GS scripting is slightly different to the Trainz 2004, 2006, 2009, 2010 scripting.
This is a fact with the steam locomotive engines kuids from TC3.
So even though the textures are converted to TGA's and configuration files are converted for Trainz 12 there could be problems with the script running 100% if the commands are not correct.
Some trainz veteran enthusiast have modified some of them in the past.

And that basically is the second issue, often the mesh is exactly the same its just the scripts that are different, the back dated ones use scripts that are not quite as stable or robust as the later ones.

Cheerio John

 

[S301]

Bingo and if N3V would have co operated when asked to would never have been a problem

You wanted us to support obsoleting one author's assets with another author's assets. This will NOT happen in regards to 3rd party content.

Implementing such a system will simply open up all content to being obsoleted by another person to cause issues (e.g. I could obsolete every asset you uploaded with a new asset that is just a white box...). Sure, it might get removed and the offender banned. But that's no good for those who have already installed the update, and broken their routes...

Again, updates to content MUST be uploaded under the original author's UserID if you wish for the update to replace the original asset.

Any assets uploaded through a different userID are a different asset that might happen to look similar...

Regards

 

[johnwhelan]

You wanted us to support obsoleting one author's assets with another author's assets. This will NOT happen in regards to 3rd party content.

Implementing such a system will simply open up all content to being obsoleted by another person to cause issues (e.g. I could obsolete every asset you uploaded with a new asset that is just a white box...). Sure, it might get removed and the offender banned. But that's no good for those who have already installed the update, and broken their routes...

Again, updates to content MUST be uploaded under the original author's UserID if you wish for the update to replace the original asset.

Any assets uploaded through a different userID are a different asset that might happen to look similar...

Regards

and where we have two assets under the same author kuid that are basically the same except the backdated one has an earlier version of a script do you have a reasonable solution?



Thanks John

 

[paulhobbs]

and where we have two assets under the same author kuid that are basically the same except the backdated one has an earlier version of a script do you have a reasonable solution?

Thanks John

The newer one obsoletes the older one, but the older one can still be downloaded.

Paul

 

[mezzoprezzo]

The newer one obsoletes the older one, but the older one can still be downloaded.

Paul

Could I please ask:

1. How does the newer one obsoletes the earlier one when the Kuid is identical (i.e. it hasn't been incremented to Kuid2)?

2. How do you choose which one should be downloaded with regard to the Trainz version the user wants the download to appear in?

 

[paulhobbs]

Could I please ask:

1. How does the newer one obsoletes the earlier one when the Kuid is identical (i.e. it hasn't been incremented to Kuid2)?

2. How do you choose which one should be downloaded with regard to the Trainz version the user wants the download to appear in?

You can't have two assets on the DLS with the same version. If the later version isn't on the DLS then increment the version number and upload it.

In TANE and TS12 SP1 right click on the asset in the main CMP window and choose 'Show versions'. Then right click on the one you want and choose 'Download this version'.

Paul

 

[mezzoprezzo]

Thanks for the explanation.

 

[johnwhelan]

The newer one obsoletes the older one, but the older one can still be downloaded.

Paul

Not quite I started with a TC3 version then subsequently released a TRS2004 version which used less robust scripts since there were requests for this. I've updated the TC3 versions so they run in TS12 but the DLS clean up process has allowed the TRS2004 version which has a different kuid number to be error corrected by someone else.

Ideally I'd like the TRS2004 specific version to be rendered invisible at least, they can be identified by 2004 in the title. Note the TC3 version was the first one produced, then later on a TRS2004 variant was created and its these variants I'd like to loose.

Cheerio John

 

[paulhobbs]

Not quite I started with a TC3 version then subsequently released a TRS2004 version which used less robust scripts since there were requests for this. I've updated the TC3 versions so they run in TS12 but the DLS clean up process has allowed the TRS2004 version which has a different kuid number to be error corrected by someone else.

Ideally I'd like the TRS2004 specific version to be rendered invisible at least, they can be identified by 2004 in the title. Note the TC3 version was the first one produced, then later on a TRS2004 variant was created and its these variants I'd like to loose.

Cheerio John

If the TS12 version and the corrected TRS2004 versions have the same user part of the kuid (i.e. the xxxx part of kuid:xxxx:yyy) then simply upload a new version of the TS12 one that obsoletes the TRS2004 version. The corrected TRS2004 version will never be downloaded unless somebody specifically specifies that they want it via 'Download this version'.

Paul