My first post so Hello everyone! 
Let me start by saying that I am not a MC player rather a backend sys for a community/small hosting so my point of view is mainly focused on aspects in this area. I've been approached over the last year countless of times to put up a MC server but never liked the idea running java along side other games due overhead/nor setting VPS/Box since there's always cost involved (time/money) so in my mind idea has to be approached rationally. I've been following this project for some time now and I like what I see.
To put this in some perspective this is where I am currently at. I decided to set a sandbox and put a instance of this project up and see what our community thinks about it. If they will like it I will put a fully fledged server up at which point I will be able to provide feedback as well as (if time allows it) contribute back to the project with core patches. Since I do not play MC I at this point cannot provide any suggestions regarding game as that feedback will be gradually provided to me by our testers, I do miss few functions on my end of things, namely:
- IP binding
We run multiple games on a box and have a IP pool assigned to it so it would be nice if I would be able to bind the game to a single IP. This sort scenario is useless for default MC due the fact it's best suited in its own environment (VPS/Box) thus gets its own IP but this project is a different beast in that perspective (no overhead involved just sorting out libs) so it allows running multiple instances on a single box (assuming resources are there..). Most of our potential clients would run small servers (5/10 users) so a decent box could easily run few instances without being converted to VPS box thus avoid some of the overhead introduced with such a setup.
My main problem in this area is basically that currently the sandbox instance is listening on all the IPs and since I wrote our game panel that kinda works against us- panel itself just checks all the ports in use (in DB) on a targeted IP when new game is deployed and assigns one that is not in use. So basically ability to bind to a single IP solves such scenarios where theoretically certain setups- like mine, could end up in deploying a server with assigned port that overlaps it. I currently solved this by assigning high port which shouldn't be reached any time soon but that's not really a solution merely a workaround.
- Startup parameters
I went over wiki (briefly, I admit) but could not find any information if it's possible to pass parameters when starting an instance? If it is, I would kindly ask if one can point me to that topic/wiki entry so I can go through it, if not than I would advocate about rethinking to put such a feature in. If such a feature is not yet implemented my suggestion would be that is prioritized over any config entries as that would solve few problems hosters face, problems like slots, ports, IP (if/when implemented) overriding by users on a multi host setup.
I hope you will consider about implemented aforementioned features but if not, I will understand. In either case, thank you for taking your time to read this.
Nate
Let me start by saying that I am not a MC player rather a backend sys for a community/small hosting so my point of view is mainly focused on aspects in this area. I've been approached over the last year countless of times to put up a MC server but never liked the idea running java along side other games due overhead/nor setting VPS/Box since there's always cost involved (time/money) so in my mind idea has to be approached rationally. I've been following this project for some time now and I like what I see.
To put this in some perspective this is where I am currently at. I decided to set a sandbox and put a instance of this project up and see what our community thinks about it. If they will like it I will put a fully fledged server up at which point I will be able to provide feedback as well as (if time allows it) contribute back to the project with core patches. Since I do not play MC I at this point cannot provide any suggestions regarding game as that feedback will be gradually provided to me by our testers, I do miss few functions on my end of things, namely:
- IP binding
We run multiple games on a box and have a IP pool assigned to it so it would be nice if I would be able to bind the game to a single IP. This sort scenario is useless for default MC due the fact it's best suited in its own environment (VPS/Box) thus gets its own IP but this project is a different beast in that perspective (no overhead involved just sorting out libs) so it allows running multiple instances on a single box (assuming resources are there..). Most of our potential clients would run small servers (5/10 users) so a decent box could easily run few instances without being converted to VPS box thus avoid some of the overhead introduced with such a setup.
My main problem in this area is basically that currently the sandbox instance is listening on all the IPs and since I wrote our game panel that kinda works against us- panel itself just checks all the ports in use (in DB) on a targeted IP when new game is deployed and assigns one that is not in use. So basically ability to bind to a single IP solves such scenarios where theoretically certain setups- like mine, could end up in deploying a server with assigned port that overlaps it. I currently solved this by assigning high port which shouldn't be reached any time soon but that's not really a solution merely a workaround.
- Startup parameters
I went over wiki (briefly, I admit) but could not find any information if it's possible to pass parameters when starting an instance? If it is, I would kindly ask if one can point me to that topic/wiki entry so I can go through it, if not than I would advocate about rethinking to put such a feature in. If such a feature is not yet implemented my suggestion would be that is prioritized over any config entries as that would solve few problems hosters face, problems like slots, ports, IP (if/when implemented) overriding by users on a multi host setup.
I hope you will consider about implemented aforementioned features but if not, I will understand. In either case, thank you for taking your time to read this.
Nate