Talk:Server List

I removed a lot of inactive servers. The limit was "last updated in 2010". I want to move this up to "1 year of inactivity". I also ordered it by last supported version. SirCmpwn (talk) 01:34, 23 August 2012 (MST)

Removing RealCraft

I don't really think this is even a real project. It's closed source, the server is always offline, the creator is always offline, and you can't even get a binary. --SirCmpwn (talk) 02:37, 23 March 2013 (MST)

Add "DB bindings" column

I'd like to add the DB bindings column that show what are the DB engines that the servers can connect to, if any, in their scripting languages. Anyone find that useful? Anyone opposed? Xoft (talk) 11:58, 27 November 2013 (UTC)

TrueCraft Version

Currently the version of TrueCraft is marked red. This can make people think it isn't developped anymore. I propose we change it to yellow or green with the text "intended" to show people that it's normal for the server to support beta 1.7.3.

AresRPG

I stumbled upon AresRPG, but I'm not too sure if this server software fits into this list. It's basically a custom-coded server written in JS for 1.16. What do you guys think? DimitarBogdanov (talk) 17:15, 29 January 2021 (UTC)

Personally, yes. Poly000 (talk) 21:30, 30 January 2021 (UTC)

Add Yatopia, Akarin

These are great servers for the newest Minecraft version, and compatible with Spigot plugins.

None of the servers in the list are based on NMS (as far as I can see), so I highly doubt they belong in there. Geolykt (talk) 12:16, 15 February 2021 (UTC)

Order of entries

Since revision 16438 got undone in revision 16444 I have to ask how the entries are ordered? From what I'm seeing the newer projects are on the top, while older (and often outdated) projects are on the bottom of the list. Having a mix where newer projects are on the bottom, somewhat older projects on the top and the oldest projects in the middle makes absolutely no sense to me. Geolykt (talk) 11:55, 25 February 2021 (UTC)

I believe that the list should be sorted in this order:

- First by the highest supported version (in a descending order) as it's more likely that a server that supports the current version is what someone is looking for.

- Then by the project activity state (as obviously active projects are more desirable) This sorting will most likely not be important at the top of the list as only active projects are going to add latest support anyways.

--Phoenix616 (talk) 15:28, 25 February 2021 (UTC)

I propose we restructure the page something like this:

- A section at the top for servers that support the latest version, ordered by development status followed by alphabetically.

- A section for servers that are either in active development and still working to support the latest version, or are inactive but support a version maybe in the range of 1.12-1.15? Or 1.8-1.15?

- An obsolete section, filled with servers that are inactive and support a version older than 1.12/1.8 (depending on what is decided).

I also suggest that all entries that are not open-source be removed, as I believe that we should be promoting open-source on this wiki. I mean, isn't this the whole point of the wiki anyway? To promote open-source? Isn't that why we provide as much documentation as we can on the backend of Minecraft freely for anyone to view?

--BomBardyGamer (talk) 15:40, 25 February 2021 (UTC)

"I mean, isn't this the whole point of the wiki anyway?"

No, not at all. It's a repository of knowledge, and how you use it is up to you. I have no issue leaving proprietary licensed projects (of which there are so few up to date this feels like a moot issue). TkTech (talk) 19:30, 25 February 2021 (UTC)

I'm going to start the reordering today, as I believe this is well overdue by now. Feel free to revert any changes that you're not happy with.

--BomBardyGamer (talk) 15:24, 11 April 2021 (UTC)