Hi PEX,

I have in all ways tried to make PEX save users, who are still in the default group - but without having to manually add them to a group my self.

I tried using the createUserRecords, but after relogging this is what it turned out as.

0ce4e7f1-87bd-42d8-82cf-d0a05fd0fbb5:
    group: []
    options:
      name: Tyloonie

As you can see, it does not save the default group to the player. Only UUID and Name.
I do not know if this is a bug, but I think the feature to save default groups should really be added to PEX.

Maybe I've just missed a setting somewhere in the config?

multiserver:
  use-netevents: true
permissions:
  debug: false
  allowOps: false
  user-add-groups-last: false
  log-players: false
  createUserRecords: true
  backend: file
  informplayers:
    changes: false
  basedir: plugins/PermissionsEx
  backends:
    file:
      type: file
      file: permissions.yml
updater: true
alwaysUpdate: false

Your guide on how to set up the config.yml (https://github.com/PEXPlugins/PermissionsEx/wiki/Plugin-Configuration) also seems a bit outdated. The "log-players" function is not even in there yet and it does not explain what createUserRecords does.

So, how is it possible to save players, who are only in the default group in the permissions.yml - WITH THE GROUP?

Thank you very much, Gentlemen.

This is the expected behavior -- when a user has no groups PEX puts them in whatever the current default group is. This allows the default groups to be changed later on without having to update a bunch of users.

Yea, but problem is... I am driving a Prison server and if people in the default group (C) has to be added to a Donor group, they loose their C group because it apparently does not save C.

Thank you so much for listening! Will there be an update for servers using 1.8.9 Spigot as well?
It would be really awesome if you could span it off before wednesday!

Do I manually have to add everyone to C for PEX to save their group or what other solution is there? I need the player to have both groups simultaneously.

Yeah, that's the usecase I've heard of before. In that case, it's valid to want to do that. The change shouldn't be too huge, so I can probably spin off a build at some point in the next few weeks (I'm right in the middle of some big internal changes to 2.0 at the moment)