Skip to content

Conversation

@camjewell11
Copy link
Contributor

@camjewell11 camjewell11 commented Jan 6, 2026

Pull Request Summary

New Features

  1. Collapsible UI Sections
  • Added collapsible functionality to all major panel sections (Claimed Loot by Wave, Unclaimed Loot by Wave, Supplies Used Current Run, and Supplies Used All-Time)
  • Each wave within claimed/unclaimed sections can now be individually collapsed/expanded
  • Entire sections can be collapsed with toggle buttons for better UI organization
  • Uses triangle indicators (▾ for expanded, ▸ for collapsed) for intuitive interaction
  1. Clear All Data Button
  • Added prominent "Clear All Data" button with red styling at the bottom of the panel
  • Includes confirmation dialog to prevent accidental data loss
  • Clears both current run data and all historical tracking data
  • Properly resets panel display after clearing
  1. Live Config Update Support
  • Panel now responds immediately to configuration changes
  • When toggling ignore settings (Spirit Seeds, Sun-kissed Bones), values update in real-time without needing to restart
  • Historical data automatically recalculates when ignore settings change

Bug Fixes

  1. Unclaimed Total Calculation Fix
  • Fixed unclaimed total to only show loot lost to deaths, not current run loot
  • Current run loot is now properly displayed separately in the "Current Run" section
  • Resolves confusion between active run value and actually lost/unclaimed loot
  1. Potion Dose Pricing Fix
  • Fixed supplies valuation to correctly price potion doses (e.g., Prayer potion doses priced per dose, not per full 4-dose potion)
  • Implemented getPricePerDose() logic for accurate potion cost tracking
  • Supplies tracking now properly reflects actual consumption costs
  1. Cross-Platform Compatibility
  • Changed bullet points from "•" to "-" for macOS compatibility
  1. Debug Logging Improvements
  • Removed "Debug Logging" toggle from config UI
  • Converted debug output to use log.debug() instead of log.info()
  • Cleaner console output for production use
  1. Ignore Settings Restoration
  • Fixed bug where ignored item values couldn't be restored when toggling ignore settings off
  • Added originalTotalValue tracking to preserve original values
  • Values now properly toggle between 0 (ignored) and original value (not ignored)

Technical Improvements

  • Injected Gson dependency instead of creating new instances
  • Improved panel data structure with separate containers for collapsible content
  • Added comprehensive state tracking for collapse/expand functionality
  • Better separation of concerns in panel update methods
  • Enhanced data persistence and restoration logic

@runelite-github-app
Copy link

runelite-github-app bot commented Jan 6, 2026

@runelite-github-app
Copy link

runelite-github-app bot commented Jan 6, 2026

This plugin requires a review from a Plugin Hub maintainer. The reviewer will request any additional changes if needed.


Internal use only: Reviewer details Maintainer details

@camjewell11 camjewell11 changed the title Mokha tracker Update Mokha tracker Jan 6, 2026
@camjewell11
Copy link
Contributor Author

What is the recommended approach to have persistent data (stored currently in xxx.properties in .runelite/profiles/) to reference large data. The plugin tracks all mokha loot in a single historical wave variable which can get quite large over long play sessions (1000's). If I wanted to create a separate file for just the historical data, is that allowed? Is there a better way?

@raiyni
Copy link
Member

raiyni commented Jan 6, 2026

Yes, you can store it in a file/files in ~/.runelite/mokhatracker

@camjewell11 camjewell11 marked this pull request as ready for review January 7, 2026 02:17
@camjewell11
Copy link
Contributor Author

Not sure if that Plugin Hub check failure is on my end or not, build passes locally and in the pipeline. Update should be good to go

@camjewell11
Copy link
Contributor Author

@raiyni Are there any additional details on the failing "RuneLite Plugin Hub Checks"? That step began failing around the introduction of the writing to file change. Is this just maintainer review required or are there fixes that need to be made?

@raiyni
Copy link
Member

raiyni commented Jan 10, 2026

As is, it's just requiring maintainer review

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants