Template talk:Config

To Do

 * Add "Resolution" setting for titles like Mega Man, which are sensitive to particular resolutions.
 * Fix alternate row shading. Unfortunately the nested if's/tables make this complex.
 * Add pop-up descriptions to config settings
 * Address bolding of sections beyond first shown /wo including excessive white-space
 * The wiki will apparently only appropriately parse "===" enclosed titles as titles if line feeds occur between each section outside of the if's. This unfortunately inserts excess white-space in cases where no sections are shown. Attempted corrections that fail include:
 * Adding white-space to the beginning/ends of sections within ifs
 * Adding white-space between sections via a secondary set of ifs

19121 rollback
I understand a desire to not impact current pages, but we will need to deal with ongoing config changes. We probably need to address such in a manner that preserves old options as input, but displays new options as output.Kolano 04:01, 21 June 2011 (CEST)
 * I absolutely 100% agree that we will need to add new parameters to this template over time -- but simply removing and breaking existing parameters that are still in use on many articles is poor practice. This is why I reverted it (for now). The change also broke the feature I added that categorizes articles in need of some parameter updates (see Category:Pages with deprecated config template parameters). 18:20, 21 June 2011 (CEST)


 * Sorry for the troubles that was caused, the 19121 edit wasn't intended to cause problems, but a merge error in my text editor broke many things... I'll commit it again when I figure out what is going on on my editor, and after this the template will be as was on 19121 but without the compatibility issues and without breaking any new introduced features... Jhonn 21:18, 21 June 2011 (CEST)

Virtual EFB
I have a quick question, and don't really know where to go with it. In r7626, and assuming beyond, there are some new options. Instead of EFB copies to ram/texture, it has checkboxes, "Virtual" and "Ram". There is nothing in the TODO on how to do this. How should this be shown? Should I just wait for the TODO to be updated? MaJoR 18:19, 26 June 2011 (CEST)

22715 rollback
This appears to have broken the config template on many pages. Some attributes were in the page source, but were not showing up on the rendered page (something that, by my understanding, we're trying to avoid). Many pages had a Graphics heading with no entries. Feel free to undo my undo if there's a bigger project going on here that I'm not aware of. --Keller999 09:02, 11 August 2011 (CEST)
 * I'm reverting it back, the Native Mipmaps and Accurate Texture Cache options doesn't exist anymore on Dolphin, so I commented out these options on template source until we think in a solution (mantaining these options for reference in older revisions or dropping it at all). Jhonn 21:17, 11 August 2011 (CEST)
 * Jhonn (or anyone up for some template fiddling), if you refer to the ratings template you'll see a method of generating categories for erroneous pages. I'd advise we revise the template to handle these options similarly until pages using them can be cleaned up.Kolano 03:12, 12 August 2011 (CEST)
 * The ratings template is using the same method that I've implemented here for handling errors (checking the input parameters with "if" and adding the pages using the outdated (or deprecated) parameters on their respective category), for the outdated entries, I was thinking in some way of putting them in a small spoiler (for reference of older revisions), but probably implementing this would cause other issues... Should we maintain it or drop at all? Jhonn 21:25, 12 August 2011 (CEST)
 * I would say that most users are using latest SVN (which the template is already being updated for) or 3.0. The overhead of maintaining every possible old variable would be a lot of work for little payoff.  I'd suggest adding another section for Release 3.0 variables only, in spoiler form.  I would say any release before 3.0 is out of luck.  I may try to work up something in the template sandbox, we'll see what you think.  --Keller999 07:29, 14 August 2011 (CEST)
 * Just as a suggestion, keeping references for older revisions *only* when the games calls for it, meaning by this that the main pages, for example config and performance, should always be kept with cutting edge revisions and only when the game specifically calls for it, older revisions should be mentioned specifically on X game page needing those, of course this calls for a user looking to use X revision of dolphin for his favorite game.Otomo 18:39, 12 August 2011 (CEST)

Further improvements
I've been working on this template a good bit. I've already committed the documentation page update, but I wanted to get your thoughts before making a big change to something as serious as Template:Config. Here's what already been commited:


 * Documentation page re-write. Only current variables are listed, the sample copy-paste block contains all current variables and is broken out so that the list at the bottom is no longer needed.

Here's what I've got teed up, if no one objects.
 * Reformatted Template:Config to be considerably more readable, with one variable per line and consistent tabbing
 * Put variables in the same order as shown in Template:Config/doc, with spacing to show General, Graphics, etc.
 * Verified and altered the if checks to see if a box needs to be displayed. They will only display if non-outdated variables are being used.

Proposed template: Template:Config/sandbox Implementation: Template:Config/sandbox/testing --Keller999 07:26, 14 August 2011 (CEST)

fpsforlimit ?
There's a conflict with the current (and my proposed) Template:Config. fpsforlimit is both in the current variables section and the "Pages with deprecated config template parameters" section. I infer that fpsforlimit would indicate what FPS number should be set for FPS limiter, which is definitely still an option in Dolphin. However, you could also argue that that information should be under Framelimit. Is this an option we should keep?

In the meantime, I'm going to remove it from Template:Config/doc so that pages aren't being added to that category left and right. We can alter Template:Config once we know which way we fall on this one. --Keller999 07:56, 14 August 2011 (CEST)