Hi, I'm doing this in a separate thread so that it doesn't get lost under unknown reports in the main thread.

BOSS v1.6 is the next version of BOSS, which I'm hoping will be released during the latter half of next week. It's currently undergoing closed beta testing of the various changes made. Before it can be released though, I'd like to hear the opinions of current users of the changes, with particular regard to those using edited masterlists, as there's some features added that will affect them more than the average user. For reference, the changelog is:



Also for reference is the WIP documentation for the next version:
http://better-oblivion-sorting-software.googlecode.com/svn/data/boss-oblivion/BOSS%20ReadMe.html
http://better-oblivion-sorting-software.googlecode.com/svn/data/boss-oblivion/BOSS%20User%20Rules%20ReadMe.html

(Right-click the page and select 'Save as...', then open the downloaded file. Chrome users will also have to change the file extension from .txt to .html. )

The main change that will affect all users is the move of all the non-executable BOSS files into a subdirectory. My first question for current users is:

1. Should there be a note in the install instructions telling previous users to delete their current BOSS.bat, modlist.txt, modlist.old, masterlist.txt and BOSSlog.txt files?

In the majority of cases, this is fine, unless the user has an edited masterlist, in which case they'll be deleting their edits. Can I rely on common sense in this case? In any case, I'd like it if they migrated to using user rules anyway.

The second change that will affect users of edited masterlists is the included updater. This will delete your current masterlist and replace it with the latest one on Google Code, so if you use it, you'll lose edits, if the edited masterlist is in the new BOSS subdirectory. This has been put in bold in the readme to ensure people know. Because such users can't use the updater, the masterlist will still be available as a separate download on Nexus, updated weekly as it currently is. The second question is:

2. Should the main BOSS archive include a masterlist file?

ATM I'm thinking that it shouldn't, because when users install BOSS, they can use the auto-updater to get the latest version, and this will be a step in the install instructions. Because this goes in the BOSS subdirectory, it won't overwrite the one in their data folder, and so edited masterlists can be later updated manually. Edited masterlists include those with edits made by BOMM, though BOMM will just re-apply the edits when you next use it, so there's no big issue there.

The third issue is connected with the above: BOSS will include user rules functionality (like BOMM has), which will allow users to define rules that change how their mods are sorted and more, while making no changes to the masterlist, and so allowing you to use the updater. The third question is:

3. For those of you with edited masterlists, but who do not use BOMM to edit them, would you switch to using user rules instead of making your edits directly?

Ideally, I'd like to see all those with edited masterlists switch to using BOSS user rules, or if they prefer to stick with BOMM, that's fine too IMO. If you think you won't switch, I'd like reasons why.

Since user rules are available along with an updater to ensure there's little reason to not use the updater, the fourth question is:

4. Would it be OK if we stopped posting masterlist updates to TES Nexus, and required that those who refuse to use the updater for whatever reason have to get their updated masterlists from Google Code manually?

Note that I haven't even talked about stopping masterlist updates with the other team members, it's not something we're planning on doing, so don't panic. I'm just interested if you would still deem them necessary.

The fifth is a straight-up question:

5. Do you use, or are you interested in using, the FCOM-only masterlist? It's really old, and I'd like to know if there's enough interest in it to warrant an update to it, or if it should just be forgotten.

That's all the questions I have for the moment, when reading the readmes bear in mind that they are WIP, and so don't necessarily reflect the finished items, and don't try to use what they say with the current BOSS, because it might not work.

Thanks.

DISCLAIMER: Any opinions expressed here are mine alone, and are not to be taken as the collective opinion of the BOSS Team, or any other individual members of the team. This thread was made entirely on my own without any input from other team members. All information posted is subject to change.

Not sure if anybody use FCOM version anymore. 21 November 2008 that was list time since it was updated. MMM 3.7b3 and UFCOM came out after this. And with that came a whole bunch of changes to fcom setup.

And I really do not see the need for a fcom masterlist.txt once again.

Since the normal boss and masterlist.txt do the same, but is more updated. Which most people use anyways, Plus with Bash taglist.txt (mini masterlist.txt ) which contains all the basic tags needed for FCOM has well. That is even more updated than the fcom version.

No need for it I think once again at this point.

Can't wait for the new features once again..html output..easy to read..thanks..

I don't edit masterlists, so... whichever way is fine, for me anyway.



Doesn't bother me either way. Probably not though, I would say.



Sounds perfectly reasonable, and happens to suit me fine.



Hehe. Didn't even know there was one! Guess that answers that...

I'd appreciate a comment about deleting the old files and having to migrate any edits. It would just serve as confirmation and a reminder



I guess there's no sense to it if BOSS now has an auto-updater, although people doing manual updates would want to disable that. Please provide a comment that it doesn't include a masterlist file. I might switch to user rules, depending on how they've been implemented.



I can't use BOMM. I refuse to shell out a wad of cash for a crappy word processor when the free version actually works better I use OpenOffice (professionally).

Anyway I do my edits manually. Most of my edits are to add the little fixes and utilities I build for my own use, so I'm not sure user rules would help me any unless there is some sort of mechanism to add new entries to the masterlist each time its updated.



See my previous comment. I'd be inclinded to use the auto updater, but if I have to keep adding my changes, then I'm going to disable it. I could go to Google Code, but the last time I tried to grab a masterlist from Google Code, I couldn't get it to work. Not sure why.



I don't use FCOM at all...

A comment sounds good, that can be done.

The updater isn't automatic, in that you have to run a separate .bat file, not the BOSS.exe, for it to update your masterlist. Not sure about a comment saying the masterlist isn't included, that's fairly obvious, but I could emphasis that you need to use the updater to get the masterlist from the internet. See the user rules readme I linked to for information on implementation, and if it's suitable for you.

Again, the user rules readme will probably clear up most (if not all) your concerns with them. User rules stick over masterlist updates, so a masterlist update is not going to make you change your rules.

@ Corepc, Breton Paladin: Thanks for posting your answers.

Yes

I don't particularly care, I'll be using the updater
Q: will the updater be available through a little shortcut at the bottom or wyre bash?


Depends on how intuitive user rules end up being, I'll have to toy around with them before I can answer this...
simpley put: if user rules are simple and accomplish the same thing without having to open up a huge list, then I will use them


Ok? Sure, but inconvenient for a minority. If this would produce more frequent updates then by all means, if it's a lot of work then don't worry about it. The latest list is available online, what does it matter if its on google code vs the nexus.


Nope, it's out of date and the reg master list does the same thing.

A question/request for a future update.
Is there any way to make the comment be hidden about bash tags or compatibility patches unless the wrong combination of esps are shown? I realize this would probably be a lot of work, would have to make a lot of if statements or else mark mods as masters for a lot of other mods or something in order to check but I think it would be very useful and a lot easier to read the boss log if it wasn't flooded with unnecessary information for your LO.
ie (current) mod X needs a,b, and c bash tags but has them in wrye bash. Boss still tells me to tag them.
(want) mod x needs a,b, and c, bash tags, boss will only tell me to tag them iff wrye bash doesnt have them tagged correctly.

A set of changes that would result in this sort of thing being possible has already been proposed (for a far-flung future release of BOSS), though whether or not that means this will be implemented is another matter. I'll keep it in mind for when we make progress with said changes.

Only edits I have made to my masterlist are rearranging SM and LAME and adding a few personal mods. I suppose the rules functionality would include Magic Overhaul preference?

Looking forward to it!

I use Surazal's excellent BOMM to keep my modlist changes persistent - Surazal mentioned that BOMM would be redundant with the new BOSS. I'd like to not think about it too much as I update my BOSS list everyday before I play. If I had to jump through multiple hoops, I would rather prefer to keep on using BOMM.


I agree that it shouldn't.


I use BOMM, and would continue to use it as it is really easy to use. The more things I learn about mods in Oblivion, I want to make other things easier for me...
BTW, the only edits I have in the masterlist are merged mods that I create myself by merging multiple existing mods. I usually don't change what BOSS suggests, and the only case I know where one needs to tweak things is the LAME/SM case that mcc84 already mentioned.


I think that the masterlist on tesnexus isn't updated everyday anyway, so no point in letting users download an old version of masterlist (as you are sure, most people don't read). But be prepared for complaints that BOSS won't work when you don't have a masterlist on nexus, and don't provide one with the download either (Item #2)!


I agree with corepc above that FCOM-only masterlist has been deprecated, and BOSS has grown in its scope from its FCOM-helper days.

Yes. Can't hurt can it? If one is not totally off the rocket one knows what one wants to save if ther is need.

No. Will quickly learn those who has not used it before and who does not read the read me understand that you need to update the list now and then.

Yes! As I too use OpenOffice I never took advantage of BOMM. With the new Userlist I can push around mods the way I want :icecream: And it is also nice that the list is separate from the masterlist.

Well why not. I already did it manually before... But a clear pointer on Nexus of course.

Eh, what

Cheers!

I'm not sure if this is the kind of thing you were talking about, but it would be really nice if Bashed Patch took priority over even mods it doesn't recognize.

Yeah I didn't mean any time soon of course, just throwing it out there. The easier it is to manager your LO, the better

Go for it, a reminder to back up your old masterlist wouldn't hurt though.



I think it should. It might come in handy if I want to reinstall Oblivion in 10 or 20 years



Yes, definitely. I don't have Word on my gaming machine, so BOMM isn't an option for me.



Fine by me.

No on both counts.

Personally I'm neutral to the technical stuff; the current system works well enough for me.
What I'd like to see is more comments on the various mods and the reasoning for their places in the load order. IOW, the Masterlist.txt could be like the accumulated wisdom of the Oblivon community in regards to specific mod conflicts.

As I recall the reason this was done was to make it insanely obvious that you've got a problem that needs fixing. Sticking stuff above the bashed patch leads to complacency and causes problems. We'd much rather things that aren't recognized get reported instead of being swept under the rug.

This will encourage me to release my little self made mods that I haven't bothered putting out - they're the only edits I've made to the masterlist. To be honest, BOSS as it stands right now does exactly what is required of it so I will probably wait a little while before I use it.

Thanks for all the replies so far, it's all very interesting.