Right now I'm going through all of the files and renaming them. So, world3.zip (End of the World) will become endworld_13.zip and so on. Just to make things a bit easier to understand.
However, I'm also willing to change all of the folder formatting as well. So I can make it so each and every D-Mod extracts into its own directory, or allow the user to specify. So which should it be? I tend to release D-Mods in the specify way, but should I change it so all of them are this way? It would clear up a few problems with people installing D-Mods... there are always question on the board about why it only displays the version number when it is started.
Or, I could just as easily re-do them all so they extract into its own folder. This would probably be best for newbies... and I could see myself getting used to it. Just extract the D-Mods right into the Dink directory, no messing around with specifying your own. Patches would be easy to install like this as well, just extract into the Dink directory and whammo.
I think it would be best to keep the old no folder name standard. Partly just because it's the standard and I don't see much reason to change it. But also I often don't like pre-asigned the folder names some d-mods use, sometimes they are too cryptic, other times too long. Also, like mimifish said, I don't like extracting zips to the main folder, if it turns out to be zipped wrong, you end up with at best a mess, and at worst overwriten files.
I believed that such a debate has been raised long before I started Dink, so I do not have any clue why most authors use the "specifying" zip.
I do see one or some tiny possible problems for extracting files into its own folder.
First of all, most people are used to specifying a folder for the new dmod. Those problems of not having the proper start always came from the problem of double folders. It is a little scary to extract files into a main folder, especially for a patch (because you need to overwrite the existing files).
The second, if you are writing a dmod, and coincidently you used a folder name that a newly downloaded dmod also uses, then you might accidentally overwrite your own dmod with the one you just downloaded if you allowed overwriting in your WinZip. It's possible... ;)
And it's also easier to create a zip file for a dmod by going into its directory and including everything inside that folder. Adding its own folder name to do the zip is a little bit more un-natural and sometimes you might include something that shouldn't be in the zip files.
I think they should extract into their own folder, you just say where dink is located. This is because:
1) Newbies will find it easier
2) The authors already (or should have) edited the diz file so the folder has a name
3) Its just easier if they are all the same
Either way, they should all be the same, because as is i have to specify the folder just incase the author needed me to. Then i need to go in and check to see if it made its own directory, then fix it if it did, blah blah blah blah blah.
Thats my story and i'm sticking to it.
I think the self-extracting idea could work well, however, in order to combat possible unwanted overwrites (ie. two d-mods having the same folder name or whatever)I propose that each member of TDN be assigned a specific number which they will use when naming folders. For example, if redink1's number was 1, his folder's would be FIAT_1, EOT_1, ect... if I were number 47 and made a dmod called Euricles of Timbucktoo, than I could name it's folder EOT_47...
: I think the self-extracting idea could work well, however, in order to combat possible unwanted overwrites (ie. two d-mods having the same folder name or whatever)I propose that each member of TDN be assigned a specific number which they will use when naming folders. For example, if redink1's number was 1, his folder's would be FIAT_1, EOT_1, ect... if I were number 47 and made a dmod called Euricles of Timbucktoo, than I could name it's folder EOT_47...
... or I could just keep a list instead of having yucky numbers in the folder name :)