No, I would not recommend that anyone waste their time like that. Instead, each time you repair an asset for yourself, check if it is on the list, and if it is then claim it and upload your repair. The additional time required is negligible, it is an excellent discipline in ensuring that your fix really is complete and correct, and it saves a lot of huffing and puffing about other people's poor repairs.
Install the app
How to install the app on iOS
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
Users of peterdhicks' East Midlands Class 222 trains - do not install todays updates
- Thread starter shaneturner12
- Start date
No, I would not recommend that anyone waste their time like that. Instead, each time you repair an asset for yourself, check if it is on the list, and if it is then claim it and upload your repair. The additional time required is negligible, it is an excellent discipline in ensuring that your fix really is complete and correct, and it saves a lot of huffing and puffing about other people's poor repairs.
Instead of yelling at one another, try yelling at me. I was the one who missed N3V's change in asset/script inheritance rules that stuffed these assets.
I knew they were complicated assets and I was careful to get the errors fixed, but in my tests I missed the inheritance issue.. For that I can do nought but apologise to all affected.
This DLS repair exercise for complex assets is a lot harder than putting new ones up. You only get one go at it.
What we have to do now is get working versions back on to the DLS.
LaterEdit: I have submitted a Help Desk request to take down the assets I broke, so we can start again on these repairs/updates..
I knew they were complicated assets and I was careful to get the errors fixed, but in my tests I missed the inheritance issue.. For that I can do nought but apologise to all affected.
This DLS repair exercise for complex assets is a lot harder than putting new ones up. You only get one go at it.
What we have to do now is get working versions back on to the DLS.
LaterEdit: I have submitted a Help Desk request to take down the assets I broke, so we can start again on these repairs/updates..
Last edited:
shaneturner12
Tutorial Creator
Thankyou for letting us know Peter. I'm not going to moan at you regarding this, as I know it can happen to anyone.
If I remember correctly though, N3V can re-add entries back into the repair list if needed.
Shane
If I remember correctly though, N3V can re-add entries back into the repair list if needed.
Shane
Yes they can. There have been some re-repaired assets for Muchison that appeared in December 2013 for instance.
It amazes me how N3V allow people to upload fixes for assets which are used in payware they are selling. At the very least these assets ought to be checked before being accepted.
I don't believe the DLS cleanup method is fit for purpose, and said so on the thread that was running. In reality, for some assets, there is only a handful of people who can fix them, and even then mistakes can happen. And once they are error free, it is not easy to find non-functioning assets again. There are several hundred of these now at least, many of them splines.
It amazes me how N3V allow people to upload fixes for assets which are used in payware they are selling. At the very least these assets ought to be checked before being accepted.
I don't believe the DLS cleanup method is fit for purpose, and said so on the thread that was running. In reality, for some assets, there is only a handful of people who can fix them, and even then mistakes can happen. And once they are error free, it is not easy to find non-functioning assets again. There are several hundred of these now at least, many of them splines.
No, I would not recommend that anyone waste their time like that. Instead, each time you repair an asset for yourself, check if it is on the list, and if it is then claim it and upload your repair. The additional time required is negligible, it is an excellent discipline in ensuring that your fix really is complete and correct, and it saves a lot of huffing and puffing about other people's poor repairs.
And if you've repaired it along time ago in a non-current version of Trains, just upload it anyway? Never mind if it doesn't work in later versions, it works in yours right? Massive over simplification of the process on your part - please don't attempt to fix anything.
Not sure what's up with DLS as the repaired content I uploaded yesterday has been sat waiting to be processed for just under 23 hours now ?!
The previous lot I uploaded was processed within 2 hours .
As for shouting , I tend not to do it on here much these days but sometimes its warranted .
The previous lot I uploaded was processed within 2 hours .
As for shouting , I tend not to do it on here much these days but sometimes its warranted .
Last edited:
And if you've repaired it along time ago in a non-current version of Trains, just upload it anyway? Never mind if it doesn't work in later versions, it works in yours right? Massive over simplification of the process on your part - please don't attempt to fix anything.
I don't know where you got that from. My comment was "... it is an excellent discipline in ensuring that your fix really is complete and correct" which means that you have brought it up to at least 2.9, you confirmed that it worked in all applicable versions, it works in all modes (not just how you intend to use it), it has a proper icon (for traincars) and a thumbnail, and so on. Additional discipline is enforced by the upload, which detects errors that CM doesn't show. That sort of discipline helps to ensure quality assets not just for your own collection but for the community as a whole.
johnwhelan
Well-known member
I don't know where you got that from. My comment was "... it is an excellent discipline in ensuring that your fix really is complete and correct" which means that you have brought it up to at least 2.9, you confirmed that it worked in all applicable versions, it works in all modes (not just how you intend to use it), it has a proper icon (for traincars) and a thumbnail, and so on. Additional discipline is enforced by the upload, which detects errors that CM doesn't show. That sort of discipline helps to ensure quality assets not just for your own collection but for the community as a whole.
Without TS12 to verify the corrections I suggest you do not try to correct any DLS content.
Cheerio John
I don't know where you got that from. My comment was "... it is an excellent discipline in ensuring that your fix really is complete and correct" which means that you have brought it up to at least 2.9, you confirmed that it worked in all applicable versions, it works in all modes (not just how you intend to use it), it has a proper icon (for traincars) and a thumbnail, and so on. Additional discipline is enforced by the upload, which detects errors that CM doesn't show. That sort of discipline helps to ensure quality assets not just for your own collection but for the community as a whole.
Your claim that the extra time is 'negligable' neglects the facts, not least because assets often get fixed locally before they were on the DLS clean-up list. Therefore the fix can't be shared at the time of the fix, and unless you expect people to regularly trawl through every asset on the DLS clean up list (currently 4660 of them) 'for the good of the community' this simply isn't going to happen. Add in the fact that people move through different versions on Trainz at different times and it can quickly be seen that your suggested workflow is nonsense.
Without TS12 to verify the corrections I suggest you do not try to correct any DLS content
Without access to TS12 to verify the corrections I would not consider correcting any DLS content. I would have thought that the above comments made it clear that any upload needs to be tested in all applicable versions.
Your claim that the extra time is 'negligable' neglects the facts, not least because assets often get fixed locally before they were on the DLS clean-up list. Therefore the fix can't be shared at the time of the fix, and unless you expect people to regularly trawl through ev ery asset on the DLS clean up list (currently 4660 of them) 'for the good of the community' this simply isn't going to happen.
I never suggested that people trawl through the list - that was your idea. What I suggested was that when people fix an asset, or get hold of the information needed to fix the asset, they check the list to see if it's listed. That takes a few seconds. If the asset is listed then it takes not much longer to check it works in the different versions, that it has a proper thumbnail etc, and upload it. There's an example here
http://forums.auran.com/trainz/showthread.php?110400-How-do-I-edit-cfg-to-correct-this-erros
where a problem was identified, some fixes suggested, and a few days later the asset gets uploaded. That seems to me a reasonable process and I cannot understand why you object to it.
If it hasn't made it onto the list when the repair occurs, then obviously it misses out, unless perhaps you come across the repair sometime later, when you can check the list again. Trawling the list takes more effort than it's worth, but looking up a particular asset takes almost no time at all.
Add in the fact that people move through different versions on Trainz at different times and it can quickly be seen that your suggested workflow is nonsense.
Are you referring to the situation where a repaired asset goes (for example) straight from 2.0 to 3.5, meaning it is still faulty in TS2010? That's the nature of the process and can only be addressed by N3V, but they have already confirmed that the cleanup is for the current version and not for previous versions, and skipping builds is OK. Given it's a one-shot process there's not much alternative, and for some assets the work needed to make them function in 2010 means the repair goes well beyond what is intended (such as copying meshes). Any repaired asset that also works in earlier versions is a bonus. Whatever, that has no impact on the workflow I proposed.
Last edited:
This is where you leave reality.
So kind of you to allow me to check the list again. Feel free to follow your method, I won't be. Make sure you check it in the latest version - oh you don't have TS12 so you can't.
Posts like your first in this thread, criticising the people who are offering fixes, makes me question why I upload any at all.
If it hasn't made it onto the list when the repair occurs, then obviously it misses out, unless perhaps you come across the repair sometime later, when you can check the list again.
So kind of you to allow me to check the list again. Feel free to follow your method, I won't be. Make sure you check it in the latest version - oh you don't have TS12 so you can't.
Posts like your first in this thread, criticising the people who are offering fixes, makes me question why I upload any at all.
BuilderBob
New member
Make sure you check it in the latest version - oh you don't have TS12 so you can't.
Better idea - get someone else to check it in TS12, with a different PC and a different set of tests. Oh! perhaps that is exactly what's happening. You don't know, I don't know, and your comment is unwarranted.
No it isn't - someone who may, or may not, be fixing assets (he hasn't said), is trying to force his imagined way of working onto others, without the slightest understanding of their position or existing ways of working. All he has contributed is griping to this thread, nothing else as far as I can see.
In any case his whole premise is that it takes a 'neglible' amount of time to 'check that it works in all the different verions', can hardly be true if he has to send it to someone else to test it in TS12.
If you had read the thread properly you would know this already - perhaps it is your comment which is unwarranted?
In any case his whole premise is that it takes a 'neglible' amount of time to 'check that it works in all the different verions', can hardly be true if he has to send it to someone else to test it in TS12.
If you had read the thread properly you would know this already - perhaps it is your comment which is unwarranted?
Last edited:
BuilderBob
New member
No it isn't - someone who may, or may not, be fixing assets (he hasn't said), is trying to force his imagined way of working onto others, without the slightest understanding of their position or existing ways of working. All he has contributed is griping to this thread, nothing else as far as I can see.
You seem to have missed the point - that the protocol being proposed is exactly what you have done in this instance: a problem was identified, the solution was posted, some applicable assets were discovered in the list, claimed, fixed and uploaded. That's what makes it difficult to understand why you object so strongly to the suggestion that others should follow a similar method.
If you own or use multiple versions of Trainz then you have already tested your fix in each of those versions. No further testing is required.
But who really cares whether it is 'neglible' [sic] or not - that's an assessment the volunteer will make, and it's different for everyone. You are still making assumptions about other people's situations, when (as you admit) you simply don't know. AFAICT the idea of checking the list to see if your repaired asset can be helpful to others is exactly the way that the list can be chipped away at until it gets down to the unfixables, which N3V can then deal with.
johnwhelan
Well-known member
If you own or use multiple versions of Trainz then you have already tested your fix in each of those versions. No further testing is required.
I own multiple versions of Trainz but it doesn't follow that I test in all the versions I own.
Cheerio John
You seem to have missed the point - that the protocol being proposed is exactly what you have done in this instance: a problem was identified, the solution was posted, some applicable assets were discovered in the list, claimed, fixed and uploaded. That's what makes it difficult to understand why you object so strongly to the suggestion that others should follow a similar method.
If you own or use multiple versions of Trainz then you have already tested your fix in each of those versions. No further testing is required.
But who really cares whether it is 'neglible' [sic] or not - that's an assessment the volunteer will make, and it's different for everyone. You are still making assumptions about other people's situations, when (as you admit) you simply don't know. AFAICT the idea of checking the list to see if your repaired asset can be helpful to others is exactly the way that the list can be chipped away at until it gets down to the unfixables, which N3V can then deal with.
The point being is that when the fix is made locally (on transferring to a new version of Trainz perhaps), it isn't necessarily on the clean up list. Updates to the list are not announced. Therefore it is very possible that someone else claims it and possibly fixes it wrongly, which has happened here, before anyone who knows how to fix it is aware of the fact. Then in rocks sailordan in post #16 with this:
NO EXCUSE actually applies to those who knew of the fix and failed to claim the asset from the cleanup list, fix it according to those instructions and upload. If it was such common knowledge that the creator was no longer participating in Trainz and a fix had been published, how come the item was still on the DLS? How many of those now complaining fixed it for their own use and then failed to share that fix with the community via the DLS Cleanup upload?
Time spent griping about inadequate fixes would be better spent getting the items off the DLS Cleanup and back into the game.
Which completely misunderstands how fixes come to light and are made, and insults the very people who are actually making the fixes, in their own way. I don't switch on Trainz to fix assets, I switch it on to develop my routes and projects. Nevertheless I have uploaded around 100-200 fixes that were of interest to me. Knowing there are demanding so-and-so's out there like sailordan who seem to know best how it should be done, and how much time I should spend doing it, make it altogether less likely I will do anymore.
The broken assets which are the subject of this somewhat hijacked thread have been re-assigned to me for repair. I am happy to attempt the repairs (again) but if some one else has a better plan I can return them the DLS repair pool.
As far as I am aware the script class is the only thing preventing them from working. If I am wrong please advise....
It seems a shame that some peoples' egos get in the way of sensible argument.
Comments on the repairs ONLY please.
As far as I am aware the script class is the only thing preventing them from working. If I am wrong please advise....
It seems a shame that some peoples' egos get in the way of sensible argument.
Comments on the repairs ONLY please.
Similar threads
- Replies
- 34
- Views
- 8K