How to pack your mods in a nice way

[DeepSoul]

Everyone has a bit of laziness in them. Packing the way I suggested isn't harder but installing mods that isn't packed that way IS harder. I agree that you shouldn't put the readme in the Data folder but can't you just create a specific folder for that called "Readme"? Wryebash does it automatically anyway. All this talk of Wryebash must make you sick but it's just a genial piece of work if you care to learn it. At least I wasn't lazy in that. :) I understand that this topic won't cause a revolution but at least it was nice(mixed feeling here) to see what people thought about it.

[AlexxEG]

Everyone has a bit of laziness in them. Packing the way I suggested isn't harder but installing mods that isn't packed that way IS harder. I agree that you shouldn't put the readme in the Data folder but can't you just create a specific folder for that called "Readme"? Wryebash does it automatically anyway. All this talk of Wryebash must make you sick but it's just a genial piece of work if you care to learn it. At least I wasn't lazy in that. :) I understand that this topic won't cause a revolution but at least it was nice(mixed feeling here) to see what people thought about it.

 

I guess it's harder if you use Wrye. And I can see your frustration. I don't really know a lot about Wrye either so...

[wetblanket]

Another BAIN zealot demanding things be done the BAIN way...

 

For the record I started off using manual installation, changed to OBMM for a while and this year started using BAIN. I've made literally hundreds of BAIN archives this year for Oblivion and Fallout 3. Maybe 1% of those took more than a couple of minutes each - hardly an arduous task. I'm quite happy for mod authors to package their mods any way they wish, it makes little difference to me.

 

Regarding:

 

4. OBMM generally sucks for installing mods because of it's archiveinvalidation feature that usually screws everything up.

 

Certainly not my experience. Perhaps you never explored OBMM's options and selected 'Archive Redirection'?

[Maigrets]

Another BAIN zealot demanding things be done the BAIN way...

 

For the record I started off using manual installation, changed to OBMM for a while and this year started using BAIN. I've made literally hundreds of BAIN archives this year for Oblivion and Fallout 3. Maybe 1% of those took more than a couple of minutes each - hardly an arduous task. I'm quite happy for mod authors to package their mods any way they wish, it makes little difference to me.

 

Regarding:

 

4. OBMM generally sucks for installing mods because of it's archiveinvalidation feature that usually screws everything up.

 

Certainly not my experience. Perhaps you never explored OBMM's options and selected 'Archive Redirection'?

 

Exactly. I have never had an issue with OBMM and use it exclusively, except for Bashed patches of course.

 

By the way DeepSoul...rudeness and a snarky attitude will get you nowhere......just saying. :facepalm: You're welcome to pack your own mods however you like them and the rest of us will do the same. Suggestions are welcome but attitude is not, even disguised as a joke, which I don't actually think it was.

 

I spoke about manually installing smaller mods, because it's it's about user knowledge of how mods work and affect the game. I personally want to know what I'm putting in my game, how to remove it properly if necessary, what changes it makes and a ton of other things.

 

Edit: Without using a package installer that doesn't tell me certain things. Just thought I should clarify that part.

 

View PostDeepSoul, on 17 September 2011 - 06:03 PM, said:

Everyone has a bit of laziness in them. Packing the way I suggested isn't harder but installing mods that isn't packed that way IS harder. I agree that you shouldn't put the readme in the Data folder but can't you just create a specific folder for that called "Readme"? Wryebash does it automatically anyway. All this talk of Wryebash must make you sick but it's just a genial piece of work if you care to learn it. At least I wasn't lazy in that. :) I understand that this topic won't cause a revolution but at least it was nice(mixed feeling here) to see what people thought about it.

 

Could you be more insulting?

Edited September 17, 2011 by Maigrets

[efikmalydoskonaly]

I don't find that problematic at all, but I would like to stress another thing, extremely easy to do and extremely irritating when not done: naming the file! Why can't anyone name the uploaded files in an informative way, like Mod's Name + version.7z ? I think it's strange that sometimes even the experienced modders don't do it, and instead I'm left with a dozen downloaded archives with names like: MyFile.zip, Finalversion.7z, patch4.1 whatever? :rolleyes:

[David Brasher]

Why can't anyone name the uploaded files in an informative way, like Mod's Name + version.7z ? I think it's strange that sometimes even the experienced modders don't do it, and instead I'm left with a dozen downloaded archives with names like: MyFile.zip, Finalversion.7z, patch4.1 whatever? :rolleyes:

 

Exactly! You hit the nail right on the head! That is one of my pet peeves. I agree that all uploaded files should have descriptive names so that when you randomly throw them into a directory with dozens of other downloaded mods, you will be able to easily find the one you want again. In this case, it is just as fast to do it the right way and name your file something like "Mod's Name + version.7z" rather than "Finalversion.7z."

[JDFan]

Deepsoul --- Tell you what - you convince MentalElf to change the way Tes4Files packages the mod files and I'm sure many modders including myself will start to package them that way !! ---- As it is since Tes4Files pretty much makes packaging a mod a simple few click process most modders will continue to use it.

[DeepSoul]

I've never tested this Tes4Files but now I can understand why people use it. What I don't understand is why it has to create a subdirectory to put the files in, instead of putting everything directly into the archive. Who benefits from that?

 

About OBMM, I think I used BSA Alteration because I had read somewhere it was the best method. I started using Wrye mainly for the bashed patch and then I got stuck with it. I still use OBMM for some OMODs that I'm too lazy to convert but only if they provide different install options, like Darn's UI for example.

Edited September 19, 2011 by DeepSoul

[lonewolfkai]

I've never tested this Tes4Files but now I can understand why people use it. What I don't understand is why it has to create a subdirectory to put the files in, instead of putting everything directly into the archive. Who benefits from that?

I, and as others have said, benefit from it since we archive our downloads in a separate file. A named subfolder that contains all the parts of the mod make it extremely important.

Edited September 19, 2011 by lonewolf_kai

[JDFan]

I've never tested this Tes4Files but now I can understand why people use it. What I don't understand is why it has to create a subdirectory to put the files in, instead of putting everything directly into the archive. Who benefits from that?

 

About OBMM, I think I used BSA Alteration because I had read somewhere it was the best method. I started using Wrye mainly for the bashed patch and then I got stuck with it. I still use OBMM for some OMODs that I'm too lazy to convert but only if they provide different install options, like Darn's UI for example.

 

Yes it is a very handy little program for packaging mods and once you've used it you never pack them without it !! I believe it puts them that way so that the error logs from the packaging can be kept separated from the mod files - so after packaging you have a record of any conflicts\problems that occurred during packaging that you can look at and correct as needed.