Maybe we don't need any clue about "repositories" or how programming works when we've seen in the past how tutorials and campaigns get borked after an "update" or patch??
As far as i am aware, ED don't fix 3rd party campaigns, that needs to be done by the developer.
Training missions are something else entirely. Still, the training missions for 3rd party modules need to be maintained by the respective 3rd party. But why bring training missions up? You suddenly object to those too?
Originally Posted By: - Ice
Just waiting for those that will say "but, but, but.... the people who work on the "core" have nothing to do with those that make campaigns!"
So? You not agreeing with that statement for whatever mythological reason is hip for today doesn't make it wrong.
Is there any actual argument coming because so far it's just noise by people who don't have a clue about the process.
Edit:
After rereading this post, i came to the conclusion that it might be a bit harsher than i intended originally. The point i'm trying to make is: There are things where criticising ED is absolutely valid, like how their modules are starting to decline in value (campaigns as DLC instead of at least one packaged with a module) or how they sometimes have knee jerk reactions even to valid criticism. Complaining however that something that costs the repository maintainer 10 seconds to pull into the project and actually generates revenue for ED and a 3rd party takes away resources from development is absolutely nonsensical.
