So, as some users who run PEX know, Stargate will throw a warning on startup stating that I will not personally offer support for PEX, and that you should switch to a real permission handler. There are multiple reasons for this, and I figure I will list them below:
1) Up until 15 days ago, permissions were loaded all-lower-case, but checked case-sensitively. This meant that when your Permissions file had "stargate.network.Central" users would be denied access to the network "Central". (This essentially made Stargate unusable with PEX without using the bridge, hence the warning on startup)
2) PEX injects itself into Player objects, overwriting the "hasPermission" and various other functions. This means that there is no guarantee PEX will respond properly and in-line with other PermHandlers when checking permissions (As seen with the case-sensitive issue that was only resolved 2 week ago). This can be seen here:https://github.com/PEXPlugins/Permissio ... x.java#L95https://github.com/PEXPlugins/Permissio ... .java#L112https://github.com/PEXPlugins/Permissio ... X.java#L62
There is no need for a PermHandler to do this, the entire point of SuperPerms was to AVOID plugins doing this, and to make sure everything works in the same way.
3) The developers of PEX have never been very cooperative when it comes to issues with other plugins. I created this ticket a month ago: https://github.com/PEXPlugins/PermissionsEx/issues/249
There was no followup, and it was still another two weeks before the issue was actually resolved.
4) When the developer blames MY plugin for "glitches" in their code, it makes me even less likely to support their plugin in the future. This is how they responded to my message warning users that PEX was a broken PermHandler:https://github.com/TheDgtl/Stargate-Buk ... nt-1057679https://github.com/PEXPlugins/Permissio ... ng-and-FAQ
They are now lying about my plugin in their FAQ (My plugin is updated more often than PEX itself is, so how they can consider my plugin not "up-to-date" is beyond me).
They will probably claim I spoke poorly of their plugin first or some such, but truth is, everything I said about their plugin is true (It is a terribly coded hack-job that was designed to mimic Permissions 2.x), while everything they are saying about Stargate in their FAQ is made up by them (And shows they don't understand basic plugin detection code).