Fabric API

Please 🥺
Since I think I'm gonna need to mixin to the class to access features that are implemented but for some reason not exposed 😟

fabric/fabric-registry-sync-v0/src/main/java/net/fabricmc/fabric/impl/registry/sync/RegistrySyncManager.java

Lines 55 to 56 in d9bddad

    
           private static final Set<Identifier> REGISTRY_BLACKLIST = ImmutableSet.of(); 
        
           private static final Set<Identifier> REGISTRY_BLACKLIST_NETWORK = ImmutableSet.of();

My question is why does the blacklist even exist. Obviously something related to not syncing certian registries would be nice incase but makes generally no sense unless you mixin to Registry and add yourself registry to REGISTRIES.

My question is why does the blacklist even exist. Obviously something related to not syncing certian registries would be nice incase but makes generally no sense unless you mixin to Registry and add yourself registry to REGISTRIES.

e.g. I manually block syncing of some recipes in nbtc, so I don't want fabric to mess that up. btw it's quite cool to keep some recipes only on the server side 🙂.
I could either block the whole registry sync for recipes through these blacklists or I would need to mixin even more to block single recipes from being synced by Fabric (maybe I should make a feature request for that).

Blame asiekierka for making them immutable! We can do this in a refactor later (the registry sync module is one of the most problematic/buggy module in fab api right now)

This no longer exists in #525

I'd say when it is merged, this issue should be changed to for example Allow blacklisting entries in registry sync

No, in #525 it is handled by the SYNCED registry attribute, which I think you can modify freely.

Well was the request the registry entries or the entire registry?

I manually block syncing of some recipes in nbtc

This makes me think it is entries, not whole registries.

I agree to i509VCB.

When I first opened this issue I thought it would be done with blacklisting whole registries but right now I‘m mostly in need to block single entries.

Maybe this should bestimmt a separate issue?

Probably a new issue. Also I noticed this was issue 509

This is more like syncing a fake registry to client instead then than a simple blacklist of registries.

These's blacklists will be removed in my PR, and an API is in place to expose marking registries as modded, synced or persisted.

No longer applicable.

	private static final Set<Identifier> REGISTRY_BLACKLIST = ImmutableSet.of();
	private static final Set<Identifier> REGISTRY_BLACKLIST_NETWORK = ImmutableSet.of();

Share to