Suggestion: Keeping old options when installing new build

[Cpeosphoros]

Would it be possible that the installer give the option to not overwrite config.xml?

IMO, it's annoying having to reconfigure everything after installing the builds - or, having to save old config.xml and copying it over the new one, with the risk of mangling any change to the file format the new build may have included.

[adrian_broher]

Would it be possible that the installer give the option to not overwrite config.xml?

No. Any installer for any software changes the system only and not the local users, because this opens a whole new set of problems.

If you want to keep certain configs, use the persistent_config.xml instead.

[Cpeosphoros]

If you want to keep certain configs, use the persistent_config.xml instead.

I didn't know I had that option.

[Vezzra]

I didn't know I had that option.

It's probably not that well documented at the moment, being more some kind of stop-gap solution/hack which isn't particularly user-friendly anyway. The perks of an open source project in alpha phase...

[Cpeosphoros]

I didn't know I had that option.

It's probably not that well documented at the moment, being more some kind of stop-gap solution/hack which isn't particularly user-friendly anyway. The perks of an open source project in alpha phase...

If I understood it right, from the changelog and reading the code, persistent_config.xml should be in the same directory as config.xml, and contain any options I don't want to be changed by new builds. Is that correct?

[Geoff the Medio]

I think it will also override any options saved when you modify them in the UI, resulting in the change being reverted the next time you run the program. It might also prevent (runtime-modified) options from propagating from the client to the server.

[Cpeosphoros]

I think it will also override any options saved when you modify them in the UI, resulting in the change being reverted the next time you run the program. It might also prevent (runtime-modified) options from propagating from the client to the server.

Right, so, if I change some option I should go to config.xml and move it again to persistent. Not so much work, considering I'm doing that now with code snippets.

[Vezzra]

Is that correct?

AFAIK yes. And what Geoff said.

[Geoff the Medio]

Right, so, if I change some option I should go to config.xml and move it again to persistent.

Or just edit persistent_config.xml directly.

[Cpeosphoros]

On editing config.xml, is it possible/planned that the Objects view's columns' width would be editable inside the UI? The config.xml has the options to adjust it, but it's kinda akward to do that from a config file, instead of simply dragging it in the UI directly.

[Geoff the Medio]

...is it possible/planned that the Objects view's columns' width would be editable inside the UI?

Would be nice / should be done, but I don't plan on doing it any time soon.

A similar issue is the current inability to manually adjust the size of the fleets and ships lists in the FleetWnd. Someone was working on it a while ago, but never got it to a useful / acceptable state.