Add Bronzeman Unleashed

[elertan]

Bronzeman Unleashed is a plugin that brings a fully customizable Bronzeman gamemode to RuneLite.

I would suggest looking at the small readme I provided at the repo, as that will give most insights on what to expect : ).
See https://github.com/elertan/bronzeman-unleashed

[runelite-github-app]

New plugin bronzeman-unleashed: https://github.com/elertan/bronzeman-unleashed/tree/32625576386b038057e0bca34772f867adf5e746

[runelite-github-app]

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

[raiyni]

We would rather you contribute to one of the existing bronzeman plugins if they are missing functionality you want.

[elertan]

We would rather you contribute to one of the existing bronzeman plugins if they are missing functionality you want.

That’s understandable, and I would have preferred to contribute to an existing Bronzeman plugin if it were practical. However, the scope of changes and the functionality I aimed to add would have required rewriting large portions of their plugin. Starting fresh was simply the more efficient and maintainable approach.

I hope that after reviewing the code, you’ll see why this made the most sense.

[raiyni]

I looked at the code and it doesn't make sense

[elertan]

I looked at the code and it doesn't make sense

Could you clarify what specifically doesn’t make sense? Reworking one of the existing plugins to have the level of configurability and features I’m aiming for would break compatibility with their current implementations. It would require a lot of backwards compatibility work, and my design takes a different approach centered around customizable rules. Which may not align with what current users or maintainers want.

For context, I also attempted to contribute to Group Bronzeman Mode about a month ago, but the maintainer hasn’t been active.

I understand that having too many Bronzeman plugins on the plugin hub also is not ideal, but I don't think it would've worked out.

[riktenx]

https://github.com/runelite/runelite/wiki/Plugin-takeover-policy

[elertan]

https://github.com/runelite/runelite/wiki/Plugin-takeover-policy

Thanks for sharing the takeover policy link.

Just to make sure we're on the same page: the plugin I built was developed completely from scratch with a very different architecture and approach, focused on letting players define all their own rules. It’s not something that could realistically be merged into one of the existing bronzeman plugins, as the design differences are too significant. Trying to make it fit would be a major undertaking and would either break their current approach or limit what this plugin aims to achieve.

Would it make sense for me to reach out to the maintainers of the existing plugins to see if a replacement could be an option? I understand the importance of avoiding too many similar plugins, but I genuinely believe this one adds real value and improves the experience in ways the current ones don’t.

I’ve put a lot of time and effort into this project just for the community, and I’d really appreciate some support in figuring out the best way forward from here.

@riktenx

[riktenx]

Give the collaboration approach an honest try including reaching out to the authors. Beyond that it's up to the maintainers on whether they'll accept this submission or not.

[elertan]

I’ve opened issues on the repositories of the other bronzeman plugins to discuss possible collaboration or a takeover. I’ll keep this thread updated as I hear back from them.

To be upfront though, I am really not looking forward to also putting a lot of effort into merging these existing plugins into one...

dekvall/bronzeman-mode#7
CodePanter/another-bronzeman-mode#32
mvdicarlo/osrs-crabman-mode#20

[elertan]

I haven’t heard back yet from any of the maintainers of the existing Bronzeman plugins. However, I did see @tugglicious mention in one of the threads that they’d be interested in helping improve and maintain the plugin if it were approved. That would give Bronzeman Unleashed at least two active maintainers from the start.

[elertan]

I've heard back from @mvdicarlo , the maintainer of Group Bronzeman Mode. He's open to the idea of me taking over that plugin, as he's no longer actively maintaining it. See mvdicarlo/osrs-crabman-mode#20 (comment)

If we decide to move forward with this, my plan would be to smoothly transition by deprecating the existing plugin and helping users by guiding them towards Bronzeman Unleashed. I could potentially add a small migration helper for that so they wouldn't lose their data.
This would, of course, depend on whether we get approval to have a temporary overlap period where both plugins would exist.

[CodePanter]

Hello! Do other niche gamemodes get this many new plugins? I felt mine was already on the nose, calling it 'another', and here we are, three more plugins have come (and gone) since then.
Anyway, I have replied on the issue you filed on my project; and I will take a look and think about it. I hope you aren't in a hurry, because what is being suggested is quite a big change, and would have to be considered properly.

[elertan]

Hello! Do other niche gamemodes get this many new plugins? I felt mine was already on the nose, calling it 'another', and here we are, three more plugins have come (and gone) since then. Anyway, I have replied on the issue you filed on my project; and I will take a look and think about it. I hope you aren't in a hurry, because what is being suggested is quite a big change, and would have to be considered properly.

There's no rush, let's just see what's the best way to approach this.
Already appreciate your willingness to look into it.

[elertan]

So far, I’ve heard back from both @mvdicarlo and @CodePanter, but haven’t received a response from @dekvall yet.

We now have another active maintainer and contributor for Bronzeman Unleashed, @tugglicious, who’s been helping with both testing and development. In addition, @scallyswags recently opened a PR to add a shop unlocks feature to Another Bronzeman Mode (CodePanter/another-bronzeman-mode#33). I plan to integrate this idea into Bronzeman Unleashed as a customizable rule, and I’ve invited them to consider contributing directly if they feel this direction fits.

That means we currently have two confirmed maintainers, potentially three depending on their response.

So, to summarize the current situation:

@dekvall (Bronzeman Mode): appears inactive, with no updates or issue responses in over five years.

@CodePanter (Another Bronzeman Mode): open to discussion and testing before deciding on replacement.

@mvdicarlo (Group Bronzeman Mode): explicitly supportive of replacement if it benefits the community.

I’m not trying to rush the process, but getting the plugin listed in a timely manner would really help. There’s been community interest in Bronzeman Mode, especially from content creators crossing over from the WoW scene, and I’d like to provide a stable, modern option for them.

@raiyni / @riktenx, would this be sufficient to move forward in some capacity?
Thanks again for taking the time to review all this and for your help throughout the process.

[pajlada]

I think that's fine then, just understand that a plugin of this size will take time to review.

I expect the initial reviews to find some things that you have to change. Please make sure you don't push new features/unrelated things with that review as this will make things even more difficult to review.

[itsbuhb]

The group aspect of this plug in is extremely desirable - the current group bronzeman mode plugin does not work at all with syncing items.

Being able to lock PoH usage, set restrictions to ground items, loot, and trade is great. Then, you have group syncing - early in 2026 I have a group of 5 who want a group BMM account, but this appears to be the only viable option and I hope it gets approved.

The alternative is to use a group chat outside of RL and message about significant unlocks.

[riktenx]

We haven't forgotten about it but it's extremely large (~14k SLOC) and the plugin is doing some networking. This means it requires both an incredibly scrutinous and lengthy review from an experienced maintainer (all of whom are volunteers).

When such a person has the time to do so it will be reviewed.

[elertan]

Has anyone been able to make some small progress with reviewing the plugin so far?

I've had quite a few people reach out to me that are interested in using Bronzeman Unleashed within RuneLite.

I understand that reviewing a plugin of this size takes a lot of effort to review and I genuinely appreciate anyone volunteering to do so.
If I could be of any help with that feel free to contact me, I'm more than happy to elaborate on choices I've made or just to answer any questions you might run in to.

To be honest though this whole reviewing process thus far has been frustrating. It's been many months and it feels like there's no progress.
I've also put a lot of effort into making this voluntarily for others enjoy but it feels like nobody wants to take the time to look at it, or at least there's not enough transparency that anyone is doing so.

Thanks

[riktenx]

To be honest though this whole reviewing process thus far has been frustrating

we are volunteers and this is FOSS IDK what to tell you my guy

[riktenx]

people that submit plugins of reasonable sizes get them reviewed in a somewhat timely manner. you have not done that and so that has not happened

[itsbuhb]

people that submit plugins of reasonable sizes get them reviewed in a somewhat timely manner. you have not done that and so that has not happened

I appreciate you, and I am sorry for my pestering. I admire FOSS, and the time you spend doing this for the love of it. I'll patiently wait for updates.

If there is a donation I can make in your - honor - please let me know.

[elertan]

First off, I want to apologize for expressing my frustration in the previous comment. I totally understand that for all of you this is also a hobby / FOSS project to maintain.

After discussing with @Ririshi, who's also been contributing and testing the plugin, we've considered ways to reduce the amount of boilerplate code and clean up other areas to make the codebase more readable and easier to review.

We also looked into removing features or splitting the plugin to make it easier to review initially, with smaller follow-up PRs after approval. However, this doesn't seem feasible. Most of the LOC consists of UI code, core architecture, or features that are essential for the MVP (e.g., networking for group play). Stripping those out wouldn't meaningfully simplify the review process and would be a lot of effort on our end.

One thing we're considering is writing a reviewer's guide to help make the process easier. This could cover the project structure, where networking (IO) code exists, and which parts of the code run on which threads (to make it easier to verify we're accessing the client thread correctly and not causing potential crashes). We're also considering adding more comments in the code itself in areas where the intent might not be immediately clear. Would either of these be helpful?

I'm open to any other suggestions on what we could do to make this reviewing process as smooth as possible.

[tylerwgrass]

I doubt someone is going to read anything other than your code and comments are unlikely to be useful.

For what its worth two months is really not that long of a time to be waiting for even a normal sized new plugin, let alone one of this complexity.

[riktenx]

Please don't spend your own personal time on our behalf making a reviewer's guide as it wouldn't be something we'd read or could trust. Your code is the source of truth.

[dc-m]

Hope we don't mind a non reviewer adding two pence in.

this may not be a valid point, and maybe the reviewers or yourself don't agree with this, but i figure an idea is an idea whether deemed good or bad.

Have you considered (as its a new plugin that's not released) creating it in smaller chunks even with it not being functional but as a disabled plugin, allowing smaller chunks to come through and once its in a releasable state it can be moved to an enabled plugin?

It may not be feasible, wanted or possible - but i thought id post the idea

[tylerwgrass]

We aren't going to add a nonfunctional plugin

[elertan]

Hey all, quick process check-in (not asking for an ETA).

I currently have a larger set of fixes/improvements ready, but I’ve held off pushing anything because I don’t want to make review harder or accidentally reset scope.

Would you prefer that I keep this PR frozen until initial review starts, or do one consolidated update before review begins?

Happy to follow whichever path is easiest for reviewers.

[pajlada]

@elertan You should be fine to push an update now. Thanks for asking

[riktenx]

• there is a lot of log.info here, which might flood users' logs, i'm not seeing anything outright bad (like log.info on a client tick or something which would not be ok) but i'm going to ask you to reconsider a lot of these and putting them at debug
• you can't evict() on your customized http client's connection pool because it's the same one as the same instance you originally @Injected. I think you can just call connectionPool() on newBuilder to set your own at which point you can do whatever
• in ShopPolicy you're doing a real-time overlay register/unregister. we don't really want people doing this because it's easy to leak registrations if events don't fire in the way you expect and then things can stay around after shutdown. generally just add on startUp, remove on shutDown, and then have the overlay track some kind of state boolean to render

[elertan]

Hey, first of all thanks for taking some of your time to review the plugin.

I'll look into addressing these first thing tomorrow morning.

Would you like me to then just update this PR with the changes or what would be best for you?

[riktenx]

You can just update the commit hash submitted here when you've made the changes plugin-side.

[elertan]

These changes should hopefully fix the issues you shared in your comment.

If there are more changes we need to make, we will try to address them asap.

Thanks again for your time!