Burning Crusade classic

[torkus]

hey! I didn't get invited to the BC-classic beta (typical) any idea how the addons are behaving this time around?

[layday]

I haven't been invited either, but I've been told TBC add-ons are all compatible with retail, and also that the beta prefix is _classic_beta_, which would suggest that they are repurposing _classic_ for TBC.

[torkus]

well that would be convenient for everybody.

[layday]

Curse have added a new 'game version' for TBC add-ons. For the time being these have a gameVersionFlavor value of null and a gameVersion of "2.5.1" in the API. An example of an add-on with TBC files is https://www.curseforge.com/wow/addons/plater-nameplates (https://addons-ecs.forgesvc.net/api/v2/addon/100547).

[layday]

It looks like you implemented the game version check in https://github.com/ogri-la/strongbox/blob/develop/src/strongbox/utils.clj#L291-L297 the same way I had, so you might be throwing TBC add-ons in with retail.

[layday]

Yep, I just tried it in strongbox and it installed the TBC version of Plater, which is the same issue I have in instawow.

[torkus]

gameVersionFlavor value of null

IIRC we can't trust that field to be correct because of addons supporting both (vanilla) classic and retail. Always null is probably the best thing for it ... unless Curseforge decide to drop support for single releases supporting multiple 'flavors'.

and a gameVersion of "2.5.1"

urgh, this is going to bite them.

Any other addons that you know of supporting classic-bc?

I'll take a look tomorrow and see how much this will affect strongbox. My holidays started a few hours ago.

[torkus]

Yeah, I was just poking around the wowi API again, looking at the v4 endpoints and their model hasn't changed.

I've seen wago.io a few times now, wondering what their deal is. Looking at the announcement it seems to center around ad revenue sharing. If they put some pressure on Curseforge to compete that's good. If they offer an API for us then that's even better, but I can't shake the feeling these sorts of organisations will lock API access down if they can't pinch some pennies from us.

[torkus]

I updated The List last week with a "classic TBC" column for those managers that support it. Let me know when/if you support it.

[layday]

Thanks, will do. Ajour supports classic TBC in the sense that they've added _classic_beta_ to the list of folders it's able to import. This currently maps to classic - Ajour won't install TBC add-ons from CF or Tukui. Not sure what the situation is with WowUp.

[layday]

WowUp seems to properly support the CF and Tukui classic TBC routes.

[torkus]

cheers, @layday , that's helpful. I'll take Ajour off the list.

[layday]

@torkus FYI, a new version of packager attaches a release.json file to GitHub releases to distinguish between add-on zips for different game versions - see https://github.com/nebularg/PackagerTest/releases for an example.

[torkus]

It might be more useful if it came with a spec. Looking at the commit history it's still all over the place. I'll give it some time to settle down and get established.

just for reference:

{
  "releases": [
    {
      "filename": "TestGit-v1.9.6-classic.zip",
      "nolib": false,
      "metadata": [
        {
          "flavor": "classic",
          "interface": 11307
        }
      ]
    },
    {
      "filename": "TestGit-v1.9.6-nolib.zip",
      "nolib": true,
      "metadata": [
        {
          "flavor": "mainline",
          "interface": 90100
        }
      ]
    },
    {
      "filename": "TestGit-v1.9.6.zip",
      "nolib": false,
      "metadata": [
        {
          "flavor": "mainline",
          "interface": 90100
        }
      ]
    }
  ]
}

[torkus]

have you heard about wow client support for multiple per-flavour .toc files coming soon?

1. Include TBC release on github? WeakAuras/WeakAuras2#3118
2. Multiple Interface Version Support Stanzilla/WoWUIBugs#68 (comment)

[layday]

I have, thank you. instawow only deals with TOCs during reconciliation so it doesn't affect me much.