Skip to content
  • Categories
  • Recent
  • Tags
  • Popular
  • Users
  • Groups
Skins
  • Light
  • Cerulean
  • Cosmo
  • Flatly
  • Journal
  • Litera
  • Lumen
  • Lux
  • Materia
  • Minty
  • Morph
  • Pulse
  • Sandstone
  • Simplex
  • Sketchy
  • Spacelab
  • United
  • Yeti
  • Zephyr
  • Dark
  • Cyborg
  • Darkly
  • Quartz
  • Slate
  • Solar
  • Superhero
  • Vapor

  • Default (No Skin)
  • No Skin
Collapse

LiquidBounce Forum

  1. Home
  2. General Discussion
  3. Why forks don't merge their changes with legacy liquidbounce and dont helping in developement?

Why forks don't merge their changes with legacy liquidbounce and dont helping in developement?

Scheduled Pinned Locked Moved Unsolved General Discussion
custombuildliquidbouncebypasscodemerging changes
24 Posts 7 Posters 2.1k Views 1 Watching
  • Oldest to Newest
  • Newest to Oldest
  • Most Votes
Reply
  • Reply as topic
Log in to reply
This topic has been deleted. Only users with topic management privileges can see it.
  • G Gabriel

    @kawaiinekololis I think that LB forks are becoming more known than LiquidBounce itself due to a snowball effect, being:

    • Minecraft Cheating dying in general
    • People making a ton of videos about LiquidBounce forks
    • People starting to forget about LiquidBounce itself
    • Some unique fork bypasses not being added to LiquidBounce, due to some people knowing what LiquidBounce+ Reborn is, but not knowing what LiquidBounce is, therefore not being able to contribute
    • Because of people not being able to contribute because they don't even know LiquidBounce exists, the remaining people switch to forks because they have more bypasses

    Only a few people such as @CzechHek, @mems, and I, are actually contributing to LiquidBounce, and making it better; but remember, YOU, dear viewer of this post, can make a difference, you just have to learn a tiny bit of coding, and step by step, you'll be way better off.

    cxtspnzwzdC Offline
    cxtspnzwzdC Offline
    cxtspnzwzd
    wrote on last edited by
    #15

    @Gabriel I am agree with snowball effect. In addition I can say I caught myself on what I am more interesting for any project fork, instead original project. Maybe it is one of reason, why forks 'more active' than original liquidbounce.

    G 1 Reply Last reply
    0
    • cxtspnzwzdC cxtspnzwzd

      @Gabriel I am agree with snowball effect. In addition I can say I caught myself on what I am more interesting for any project fork, instead original project. Maybe it is one of reason, why forks 'more active' than original liquidbounce.

      G Offline
      G Offline
      Gabriel
      wrote on last edited by
      #16

      @cxtspnzwzd People also think that LiquidBounce is discontinued, which is totally false.

      1 Reply Last reply
      0
      • M Offline
        M Offline
        mems
        Moderator
        wrote on last edited by
        #17

        I don't expect people not to think that the client is discontinued when b73 took almost 2 years to release because of a severe screw-up. With that being said there are some who don't even know that b73 got updated, they probably don't even know the client's version is 10 numbers ahead lol

        1 Reply Last reply
        2
        • cxtspnzwzdC cxtspnzwzd marked this topic as a question on
        • CzechHekC Offline
          CzechHekC Offline
          CzechHek
          wrote on last edited by CzechHek
          #18

          After all those recently rejected pull requests with "skidded" code, I came to the conclusion that this is the main cause of inactivity when compared with other forks.

          Perhaps such code should be tolerated, if it gets modified to work within LB or even if it works better than original?

          1 Reply Last reply
          0
          • M Offline
            M Offline
            mems
            Moderator
            wrote on last edited by
            #19

            I would happily merge any pull request under these rules:

            A person actually came up with this bypass
            The code is ORIGINALLY from a LiquidBounce fork and then it may have been used by paid clients / clients that don't share the same license as LiquidBounce.

            And as we speak, this lad uploaded a new pull request:

            https://github.com/CCBlueX/LiquidBounce/pull/1339/files

            How can I now know if this is really not stolen and he actually came up with this? Secondly and no disrespect towards him, but it has been repeatedly shown he doesn't really know how to code or have some sort of idea how to put something in a module and make it work. By the bad indentation I can tell he simply pasted the code from some client that as of now I don't know if it's from a LiquidBounce fork.

            NCPUser opened this pull request in CCBlueX/LiquidBounce

            closed added new crit mode. #1339

            R G 2 Replies Last reply
            0
            • M mems

              I would happily merge any pull request under these rules:

              A person actually came up with this bypass
              The code is ORIGINALLY from a LiquidBounce fork and then it may have been used by paid clients / clients that don't share the same license as LiquidBounce.

              And as we speak, this lad uploaded a new pull request:

              https://github.com/CCBlueX/LiquidBounce/pull/1339/files

              How can I now know if this is really not stolen and he actually came up with this? Secondly and no disrespect towards him, but it has been repeatedly shown he doesn't really know how to code or have some sort of idea how to put something in a module and make it work. By the bad indentation I can tell he simply pasted the code from some client that as of now I don't know if it's from a LiquidBounce fork.

              NCPUser opened this pull request in CCBlueX/LiquidBounce

              closed added new crit mode. #1339

              R Offline
              R Offline
              Razzy
              wrote on last edited by
              #20

              @mems How would you feel about me trying to merge something like this?
              https://www.bilibili.com/video/BV1JL411C7dh/?spm_id_from=333.788.recommend_more_video.0
              (I'm not Chinese It's just the only video if it I could find.)

              It's from KevinClient Reborn and im 99% sure no other client has this that I've found so far. Pretty sure I could make some improvements to it aswell due to the glide aspect of it being pretty inefficient.

              Plumer ManP 1 Reply Last reply
              0
              • M Offline
                M Offline
                mems
                Moderator
                wrote on last edited by
                #21

                Just make sure it's under the second rule I stated:

                The code is ORIGINALLY from a LiquidBounce fork and then it may have been used by paid clients / clients that don't share the same license as LiquidBounce.

                If the guy who made it stole it from a non-LiquidBounce fork, then sorry but no. If not, then feel free to make one.

                1 Reply Last reply
                0
                • R Razzy

                  @mems How would you feel about me trying to merge something like this?
                  https://www.bilibili.com/video/BV1JL411C7dh/?spm_id_from=333.788.recommend_more_video.0
                  (I'm not Chinese It's just the only video if it I could find.)

                  It's from KevinClient Reborn and im 99% sure no other client has this that I've found so far. Pretty sure I could make some improvements to it aswell due to the glide aspect of it being pretty inefficient.

                  Plumer ManP Offline
                  Plumer ManP Offline
                  Plumer Man
                  wrote on last edited by
                  #22

                  real most hardest to find bypass

                  mc.thePlayer.motionY = mc.thePlayer.ticksExisted % 2 == 0 ? -0.2 : -0.1;
                  
                  R 1 Reply Last reply
                  0
                  • Plumer ManP Plumer Man

                    real most hardest to find bypass

                    mc.thePlayer.motionY = mc.thePlayer.ticksExisted % 2 == 0 ? -0.2 : -0.1;
                    
                    R Offline
                    R Offline
                    Razzy
                    wrote on last edited by
                    #23

                    @Plumer-Man yeah, i made a script out of it to try and it was terrible

                    1 Reply Last reply
                    0
                    • M mems

                      I would happily merge any pull request under these rules:

                      A person actually came up with this bypass
                      The code is ORIGINALLY from a LiquidBounce fork and then it may have been used by paid clients / clients that don't share the same license as LiquidBounce.

                      And as we speak, this lad uploaded a new pull request:

                      https://github.com/CCBlueX/LiquidBounce/pull/1339/files

                      How can I now know if this is really not stolen and he actually came up with this? Secondly and no disrespect towards him, but it has been repeatedly shown he doesn't really know how to code or have some sort of idea how to put something in a module and make it work. By the bad indentation I can tell he simply pasted the code from some client that as of now I don't know if it's from a LiquidBounce fork.

                      NCPUser opened this pull request in CCBlueX/LiquidBounce

                      closed added new crit mode. #1339

                      G Offline
                      G Offline
                      Gabriel
                      wrote on last edited by
                      #24

                      @mems Actually, FDPClient made the original AAC5 Fly, and had it's own AAC5 velocity values that do the same thing that Rise's later AAC5 Fly did. Also, Rise severely skidded from LiquidBounce (at least 5.90-5.100), with proof being here (I found it myself). It's just that some clients are too big to fail, so the developers resort to skidding, though I haven't seen skidded code in 6.0 yet.

                      1 Reply Last reply
                      0
                      Reply
                      • Reply as topic
                      Log in to reply
                      • Oldest to Newest
                      • Newest to Oldest
                      • Most Votes


                      About
                      • Terms of Service
                      • Privacy Policy
                      • Status
                      • Contact Us
                      Downloads
                      • Releases
                      • Source code
                      • License
                      Docs
                      • Tutorials
                      • CustomHUD
                      • AutoSettings
                      • ScriptAPI
                      Community
                      • Forum
                      • Guilded
                      • YouTube
                      • Twitter
                      • D.Tube
                      • Login

                      • Login or register to search.
                      • First post
                        Last post
                      0
                      • Categories
                      • Recent
                      • Tags
                      • Popular
                      • Users
                      • Groups