Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Allow more specificity when performing rollbacks/restores, if possible #70

Open
Ystheria opened this issue Sep 13, 2023 · 0 comments
Open

Comments

@Ystheria
Copy link

Is your feature request related to a problem? Please describe.
There are certain instances when I need to do a very specific restore or rollback with prism, and it currently does not support such specificity to my knowledge (or I am too dumb to figure it out lol)

Describe the solution you'd like
I would like to specify that I am performing a rollback/restore that only affects specific blocks/entities, such as chests that have had items moved/removed, while excluding other blocks/entities. For insance, when I am trying to perform [/pr rb a:item-remove r:# t:# p:(name)], I would like to specify what exactly item-move is being done on without having to do it on every individual chest or shulker. I would also like to see this extended to item-insert functions to specify whether I am doing this to item frames or armor stands as well. I understand that it will be limited to all chests/etc within a specified radius if it can be done, and this is exactly what I am asking for!

Describe alternatives you've considered
An alternative would possibly be to exclude everything that you don't want to target, but I feel like this would be a much more tedious and time consuming solution than the one mentioned above

Additional context
That's just it! If you would like any additional information regarding this request, please feel free to let me know, and I will assist in any way I can!
btw, this is for prism v3 specifically, but perhaps implementing it elsewhere would also be beneficial!

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

1 participant