Re: Some questions and some feedback on batch-convert: no improvement for 6.00.0
- View SourceI have now finished the conversion of my datasets to 6.00.0. At least the converter doesn't give any errors any more.
I will still need to test the results to see if things indeed work, but the improvements in the converter have helped me a lot. It has easily saved me a few hours of clicking through things.
also the tips on how to run the converter with more memory were essential.
Limitations like the refusal to overwrite an earlier conversion attempt have gone from being a some painful minutes to select everything again to just a small annoyance of a few seconds of clicking Next.
It made a big difference.
--- In email@example.com, James Dempsey <jdempsey@...> wrote:
> Hi Adriaan,
> On 7/03/2013 5:31 AM rogerwllco wrote
> > Some very nice improvements, thanks.
> Excellent, thanks for checking it out and for the good suggestions.
> > I would still like to see file name and line numbers for the reported warnings and errors.
> Unfortunately that is quite a difficult task and one that won't be
> possible in the short term.
> > Filenames would especially be useful for the popups. I've just been hunting the Innate Spell feat in 5 sources to find which one it was complaining about (good thing I have grep).
> I can have a look into that one.
> > By the way, I pity the old CMP data monkeys. Apparently WotC hadn't learned of the existence of copy-paste yet in 2004, all versions are worded differently and have slightly different mechanics and prerequisites. And it's not CMP's fault, it's in the books themselves, not even corrected in the errata...
> Yeah the rules can be quite painful like that.