I've generally taken the approach that features such as this unless start to break the server in some way, just end up as "Semi-Supported" in that we will not break them intentionally, but probably won't test / fix issues with them. I don't really see a reason to remove it for the sake of it...
if we aren't gonna ever use it, i think it should be removed, as it is useless and may end up being a bit of a hassle if we try and mantain a feature which we aren't even planning on using
I Vouch. Unless TF plans to use Pterodactyl in the future, there's really no reason to retain integration. Why bother maintaining a feature that isn't going to be used anyways.
object agree with wild
Slight but relevant bump. I just tested the Pterodactyl integration and as it stands in the AMG repo, it is broken. I rewrote it entirely primarily because I am using it. Either it should be rewritten or removed. It seems useless to keep it in if it's actively broken
↩ Telesphoreo In that case can you raise a bug on the forums please? If you have already re written it you're welcome to pr it back as well.
↩ @'Ryan' Do I really need to file a bug report?... Seth wrote it when Pterodactyl was in beta and we had no choice except to write it in the beta API. I rewrote it using Pterodactyl4J rather than raw JSON because it now uses weird headers and the documentation for 0.7 was much better. The bug was that it was using the old API and it flat out doesn't work on new versions of Pterodactyl
Edit: made a PR on JDA and TFM with their respective fixes / additions
As I said, we won't remove the functionality for now, simply not something we will actively test / support ourselves.
