That Is somewhat mormal for the First time you go there, also it will take longer depending on wheter you have "open" packages as well as how many...

But the Last marker is the Last marker. That's its point.

If you want newly added mods to be separated from the rest of your mods, right click the header, make a new marker, call it "New Mods load below this marker". It will appear above the Last marker, and any new mods you add after that will appear between it and the Last marker.

I think the system is supposed to work like:

My painstakingly sorted packages
new stuff (unsorted)
== Last ==
stuff I want to make sure never gets overridden

Then when new stuff comes in, you sort it (painstakingly) : )

How about this:

• Right Click->Add Marker...
  
• Type in "New Packages Loaded Below This Marker"
  
• Add new packages. They will load between "==New Packages Loaded Below This Marker==" and "==Last=="

Why? Things you do not want to be overridden should simply be given higher installation priority. That's the point of ordered installation.

My BAIN Package List - http://sites.google.com/site/oblivionpoinfo/lists/mybainlist <-- I have not seen an organization method that makes more sense to me than this. I want organized, logical package order (which reflects organized, logical installation order) not random stuff that needs to load last... The last marker is special because new packages are added after it. Why wouldn't you want those separate from the rest of your packages. The sorting you have described there shows randomly added packages dividing your sorted groups. That makes no sense to me. When you have many packages, picking out the last marker is no simple task, not to mention picking out random packages right next to the sorted packages. If they happen to seem to be in a logical order, you may have trouble distinguishing them from your sorted packages. It is easiest to just not have to worry about that at all.



I am not requesting this feature for myself. I have 700+ packages in BAIN and have had no problems managing. However, when I give that advice on my site, placing the last marker at the top of their sorted package list, a number of users have been confused. Many users do not really know what that is for... I do explain that on the site, but I guess the name wipes that explanation out of their minds or something...


Edit: I do not need an additional marker. New packages load above the last maker, above all of my sorted packages. AND, I do not need to give users another setup step. It is hard enough to get them to read whatever is already there.

Why would it be at the top of the sorted package list? It's supposed to be LAST except for ones you want to have permanent priority.

It's not intended to separate "sorted" from "unsorted", it's supposed to provide a means to give personal packages permanent priority.

Use a new marker to separate "sorted" from "unsorted" if you need it. There's no reason to break the function of the Last marker.

See my post above, and what is the significance of "permanent priority"? Who said anything about breaking functionality? Changing its name does not do that. Having at the bottom or the top of your package list does not do that? Is there some difference between the significance of an order number if the number is below or above the last marker?

The purpose of the "Last" marker is that you put it last in your priority list. Then you move any packages that you always want to have install priority (ones that should override any other packages) past the "Last" marker. That way, any new packages you add will always have lower priority than the ones you moved past the "Last" marker, because they are inserted before the "Last" marker.

If you put all your packages beyond the "Last" marker, then you no longer have any with special priority. I suppose it wouldn't "break" the function of the "Last" marker, technically, since the packages you put last would still be last, but it's not what the marker was intended for, and if you are recommending that use you are doing a disservice.

If you want a marker to separate newly added packages from older ones, you can make one yourself, or you could request a new marker be added, I suppose, but I don't see the purpose of it.

I don't see the purpose of that marker if you have all of your packages in the proper order. Basically, you have said there is nothing special about packages being installed on either side of the marker outside of the fact that packages below it will be override the packages below it. That is true of any package, right? If a package is in spot 5, all packages with numbers bigger than 5 will override that package. What am I missing here? What does "permanent mean"? There is no reason to request a marker for splitting sorted and unsorted packages because the last marker can already do that. Regardless of where the Last marker is, packages with higher priority override those with lower priority. Are you suggesting that people are throwing random packages that do not need to be sorted above the Last marker, and sorting those below it?


Edit: I am trying to understand the functionality of that marker. The only thing I know is that newly-added packages are put above it.

Edit: I am asking for someone to explain what the "special priority" of packages is when they are put below the last marker. No one has explained this.

Edit: Does my package list not make sense? Could someone, for example, explain the benefit of my moving the Last marker elsewhere in that list, please?

Okay, let's try this again.

Packages that have conflicting resources will be installed in such a way that the highest numbered package (in the order list) wins. Those resources will be the ones that show in the game.

Newly added packages (archives) are added to the bottom of the order list. Just before the "Last" marker/separator.

Wrye Bash is coded so that you can manually move packages beyond the "last" marker. Because newly added packages are added _before_ the "last" marker, any packages that you manually moved beyond the "last" marker will NEVER have a newly added package over-ride them.

That's the purpose of the "last" tag. It's for people who don't fanatically sort their packages every time they add a new one. I don't for one, unless I think it's important.

I don't care if you disagree with me not sorting my packages every time I add a new one. I don't care if you don't think it's a good use for the "last" marker.

That's what it is for. It does what it is for properly.

If you want a new feature, request it. Just accept that the "last" marker is doing exactly what it was meant to do. It's just not doing what you wish it was meant for.

That is the entire functionality of that tag. It designates a place for newly added packages to be placed so that they don't over-ride packages that come after the "last" marker.

It does exactly what I want it to do, actually.


Edit: Newly added packages never override anything in my package list either because all of my sorted packages are below the marker. Even if you do not sort your list every time you add a package, if they are below the last marker, you do not have the problem of them being overridden. So I was right in concluding that the Last marker's position has no bearing on how BAIN treats packages. It just happens to be named "Last"...

I was asking someone to explain the supposedly additional functionality. There isn't any. Users can use the marker however they want. I still think that the "New Packages Are Added above This" is more accurate. Users are putting it last in their load order, which nullifies the use you proposed for it as well.

"manually moved beyond the "last" marker will NEVER have a newly added package over-ride them."

If users have the marker actually loaded last, newly added packages are ALWAYS in a position to override everything else. Now, do you get why I think the name should be changed? Fine, it does not have to be first, but the name is still confusing for some. It does not tell the user what it does at all...

Then why are you complaining, trying to change the name or whatever the heck you are doing here?

I see you two are having a great fun time discussing the last marker in 5 thousand words... but move it to the new thread before ya get locked (more than 210 replies now).
http://www.gamesas.com/index.php?/topic/1092258-relz-wrye-bash-thread-no-42/
Pacific

last topic I asked about making edits and someone told me to send my edits to the main developers. The only problem was that some of my edits were going to include different methods of packaging (Removing dependencies altogether besides python itself). And some of them were going to be rather major edits (menubar, and other UI changes)

EDIT: Oops meant to put this in the new topic...

I know the Wrye Bash readme says - "Supported doc types: text files, html and mht (html archives)" but it does display some RTF files as well.

What I would like to know is: Are RTF files now supported (just not explicitly stated)? If not can it be added at some point? Secondly why are some RTFs displayed properly whilst some show all the formatting tags as well?

I've got version 284 and the Wrye Python 02 package installed. Same situation existed for me with all previous versions and Wrye Python 01.

To illustrate have a look at any readme from Reneer and you see RTFs with tags displayed. The same thing with Supreme Magicka's readme. With Deathless Aphrodite's Storms & Sounds readme though displays correctly, same with "Let there be Darkness".

Many other readmes but you get the idea. All these files display properly in every other program I have that reads RTFs.

Post limit.