Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Loading resource pack from URL #4060

Open
emmanuelvlad opened this issue Aug 17, 2023 · 3 comments · May be fixed by #4205
Open

Loading resource pack from URL #4060

emmanuelvlad opened this issue Aug 17, 2023 · 3 comments · May be fixed by #4205
Labels
Feature Request A feature request.

Comments

@emmanuelvlad
Copy link

What feature do you want to see added?

I wish we could set the URL of the resource pack and of the mappings, when a player connects it will automatically fetch from that endpoint

Are there any alternatives?

Local updating for each server

@emmanuelvlad emmanuelvlad added the Feature Request A feature request. label Aug 17, 2023
@onebeastchris
Copy link
Member

Unlike Java edition, Bedrock wants the resource pack to be sent in parts (https://github.com/GeyserMC/Geyser/blob/master/core/src/main/java/org/geysermc/geyser/network/UpstreamPacketHandler.java#L302-L334). Hence why you need to input the pack into Geyser's packs folder, instead of a link like on Java edition

Technically, Geyser could download a pack and place it into the packs directory itself, however, this seems out of scope for Geyser. A Geyser extension could do it, and then send the pack by listening to either the SessionLoadResourcePacks event, or the GeyserLoadResourcePacksEvent to apply it as a global pack.

Mappings, unlike resource packs, are loaded when Geyser starts up; not when each player connects (hence, why per-session-mappings arent possible). They too can be registered with extensions, but that's a different story.

What's a usecase that would benefit from a URL instead of a file if you dont mind the question?

@emmanuelvlad
Copy link
Author

What's a usecase that would benefit from a URL instead of a file if you dont mind the question?

For me, it will prevent from rebuilding a docker image and also gives an easier CI/CD workflow for updating the resource pack

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
Feature Request A feature request.
Projects
None yet
3 participants
@emmanuelvlad @onebeastchris and others