[QUOTE=dingusnin;45751389]Wasn't there a rule, back when Binary Modules sub-section was still around that source code should be released as well? I understand that this is not part of the current set of rules, however this might be why so many are asking for it.
Releasing the source code (on github for example) is ALWAYS a good idea. You will get more input, people offering to help, and suggestions for optimization. All round a decent way to get into the community. I fully understand that you are/were under no obligation to do so, but the rude replies you have given to those asking for the source code were, well, less than kind.
I am sure many will find this a useful tool, although I prefer using Linux myself, that's not to say that others won't use it. Good job.[/QUOTE]
I found it pretty rude to ask for the source code when it has not been provided, at least that's how it appears to me, and they looked more like demands rather than requests, so there's also that.
In other news, just updated to new version with processor affinity selection and the scheduled restarts.
[QUOTE=Blasteh;45752535]I found it pretty rude to ask for the source code when it has not been provided, at least that's how it appears to me, and they looked more like demands rather than requests, so there's also that.
In other news, just updated to new version with processor affinity selection and the scheduled restarts.[/QUOTE]
No one was being rude or demanding about it lol, the only "demand" I saw was from the original guy. I thought I said it pretty nicely. We just asked, it's up to you to provide it or not. However most people with projects like this do provide source to get community verification of the code. Plus I have barely seen you around, so I'm very weary to download and run an exe without seeing what it does. Also, it's great for people who just want to see how you did it, and to learn from. Anyways, I'm done on this subject, it's pointless arguing over something as this.
[QUOTE=crazyscouter;45752630]No one was being rude or demanding about it lol, the only "demand" I saw was from the original guy. I thought I said it pretty nicely. We just asked, it's up to you to provide it or not. However most people with projects like this do provide source to get community verification of the code. Plus I have barely seen you around, so I'm very weary to download and run an exe without seeing what it does. Also, it's great for people who just want to see how you did it, and to learn from. Anyways, I'm done on this subject, it's pointless arguing over something as this.[/QUOTE]
Crazy, Yes no one was acting rude by asking for source code but if you would of read what he said at the beginning [QUOTE]I found it pretty rude to ask for the source code[/QUOTE] . You can see that he said that [B][I]he[/I][/B] found it rude.
[QUOTE=dingusnin;45751389]Wasn't there a rule, back when Binary Modules sub-section was still around that source code should be released as well? I understand that this is not part of the current set of rules, however this might be why so many are asking for it.
Releasing the source code (on github for example) is ALWAYS a good idea. You will get more input, people offering to help, and suggestions for optimization. All round a decent way to get into the community. I fully understand that you are/were under no obligation to do so, but the rude replies you have given to those asking for the source code were, well, less than kind.
I am sure many will find this a useful tool, although I prefer using Linux myself, that's not to say that others won't use it. Good job.[/QUOTE]
Yeah back when binary modules were frequently made, we required the source code for the module to accompany the release. These days not so much it seems.
Taking the client/server idea I posted above, you could probably get a Linux version of this working on Mono. However my experience of having System.Windows.Forms working nicely on Mono has been rubbish to say the least due to font problems.
Connection failed after 4 retries?
Didn't read the whole thread so don't know if anyone has this same problem :v:
[QUOTE=Richtofen;45758453]Connection failed after 4 retries?
Didn't read the whole thread so don't know if anyone has this same problem :v:[/QUOTE]
Type status in the server console, then use the same IP that it shows. You'll want the internal IP if it shows that.
Updated and fixed the crash counter.
For anyone using more than 8 cores and use affinity, the new update needs to be tested.
Server doc is still the best utility imo
Updated, program will now restart the server on the map that was playing before the crash.
[QUOTE=Blasteh;48843007]Updated, program will now restart the server on the map that was playing before the crash.[/QUOTE]
does this mean we can get the source code now?
import/export file config, priority set?
[QUOTE=matiasg90;49620887]import/export file config, priority set?[/QUOTE]
Check the latest version in top post.
Is this safe to use? My machine detected it as malware.
[QUOTE=Ta;49683467]Is this safe to use? My machine detected it as malware.[/QUOTE]
is safe
Pretty much stopped working on gmod stuff, so I've put the code up on github, check OP.
not downloading.
only me?
[QUOTE=jake3777;51028532]not downloading.
only me?[/QUOTE]
[url]https://github.com/blastehh/SRCDS-Server-Monitor/raw/master/SRCDS%20Server%20Monitor/SRCDS%20Server%20Monitor/bin/Release/SRCDS%20Server%20Monitor.exe[/url]
This doesn't appear to be working for me.. When i launch it i get no errors, but nothing happens.
[QUOTE=Blasteh;51038161][url]https://github.com/blastehh/SRCDS-Server-Monitor/raw/master/SRCDS%20Server%20Monitor/SRCDS%20Server%20Monitor/bin/Release/SRCDS%20Server%20Monitor.exe[/url][/QUOTE]
thanks. Can't I run this app with PHP or HTML?
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.
