Sharing modified "config.cpp" files?

[Pvt_Parts 0]

I searched "sharing modified" and "sharing configs" and did not see anything looking relevant. If this was already answered please inform me the keywords to search by, or the links it is at.

---------------------

I noticed there are quite a few mods that overwrite eachother's eventhandler entries. I just "cracked open" the PBOs for all the mods and addons (is there are difference between mod and addon?) and began looking at how I could implement the Extended Event Handler with them. If I am successful in converting them, is it considered acceptable to share the config.cpp file (or a patch file of it) alone? Or would I have to get permission from the author first. Mind you, I would attempt to contact them with the changes either way.

To clarify, I mean that it would be as follows:

<first mod's name n ver>\<PBO name>\config.cpp

<second mod's name n ver>\<PBO name>\config.cpp

I'd state reference to the original author and release thread when possible.

I ask what may be a stupid question to some, because I have noticed some people release standalone modifications of others works without stating if they got permission, and people praise their work. I've also seen posts where people condemn them. (Not just this forum, but others sites that also come up in google).

Thank you for taking the time to read my question.

[BraTTy 0]

Config.cpp is still an addon and a work of art so you will need original authors permission.(even tho BIS didn't really say we can modify/distribute main config.cpp's) Could mess up the whole game (and has)

Modified config.cpp get detected on MP games for one and server owners would only allow known trustworthy modified config files to run

It takes some skill and lots of testing to get things working right

A lil story (surely got it wrong but you will get the idea)

Thunderbird from OFP first wants to replace Bis models with newer user made addons

He completes that and does testing and server owners test his stuff to, works out the kinks

Then decides change sounds, smoke, animations and he went crazy!

Took him many months and many many hours I know , lots of testing and now he is a Config guru, something he didn't plan on I believe and people trust his work

He wouldn't like it if you ripped up his stuff nor would anyone that is making Arma config's

First concern they would have is that you would render their config replacement unusable by conflicts/errors

And to answer your question about overwriting eventhandlers ...they shouldn't be

Take a look here: http://www.flashpoint1985.com/cgi-bin....t=66789

[Pvt_Parts 0]

(Not quoted in original order, but in the order of responses coming to mind after reading)

Quote[/b] ]And to answer your question about overwriting eventhandlers ...they shouldn't be

Take a look here: http://www.flashpoint1985.com/cgi-bin....t=66789

!?!!? Umm... That is the whole purpose of the Extended Init EventHandlers; to prevent multiple addons from overwriting eachother. It says so right on the page. Maybe you meant to link to a page that said patch 1.08 changed the behavior to chaining them instead of overwriting them?? (I did not see such a thing in the list of changes). There are still a lot of addons out there that do not use the Extended EventHandler addon; and that is the main reason for wanting to tinker with the files. I wanted to make them compatible.

Quote[/b] ]Modified config.cpp get detected on MP games for one and server owners would only allow known trustworthy modified config files to run

That is obvious. It would be a variation of the original. Unless incorporated by the original authors as an update, I would not think they'd be used for anything buy SP and coordinated coop.

Quote[/b] ]It takes some skill and lots of testing to get things working right

I've already read about how the Extended Fired EventHandler has it own set of problems that often need to be coded around. Most of the inits would probably be straight forward though.

Quote[/b] ][...] He wouldn't like it if you ripped up his stuff nor would anyone that is making Arma config's

First concern they would have is that you would render their config replacement unusable by conflicts/errors

Got it. Unless every original author (nested several layers deep for some mod-of-a-mod-of-a-mod-of-a-mods) for the files authorize it, I will keep the compatibility fixes to myself. To avoid ruffling any feathers (thats not sarcasm, I mean to avoid irritating/angering anyone), I would not even talk about how (meaning the summary of the steps taken) I fixed them.

I've read about people wishing a standard could be started (of using addons like EEH1.1, etc) to keep addons behaving well together. I even read threads about developing unified ammo configurations that are ballistically correct (like NWD's mods). That would make things much smoother.

By the way: In reference to overwriting, I know that it is happening, because activating certain combinations of addons make seemingly unlrelated features of other addons stop working. (Yes, loaded by itself it works.)

Thank you for your answer.

--------------------

On the 'net, my "tone" of writing is often mistaken as sarcastic or mean. This post was meant respectfully, polite, and of a calm tone. This statement will hopefully reduce the misunderstandings.