Bartender4 

Hi, I'm experiencing a bug with bartender but am not getting any lua error messages. I play a rogue (bar 1 changes between stealth and non-stealth) and occasionally (not sure what causes this to happen) my bar 1 will have all the abilities that bar 2 has on it (regardless of stealth or not), but bar 1's keybinds remain the same. Bar 2 always remains unchanged.

I have experienced this happening upon zoning into an area (arena, bgs, even happens zoning into heroics), and have also experienced it happening seemingly randomly in the middle of a bg. This issue is not fixed by a /reload, or by zoning into a different area (must log out or open a new client to fix it).

My bartender bar 1 is set to be hidden unless I am driving a vehicle using the conditional
This more than likely isn't the issue, but I'm just trying to give you all the info I have.

I have downloaded the newest version two times and the problem still persists.

Sorry I can't provide more info and thanks for any help you can provide.

I'm totally sure you do not just want this out of curiosity.
So, please, elaborate.

hi, i would like to set several bartender settings...

for example:
Bartender4.db.profile.BagBar.enabled = false


is there any way how i can write / edit bartender4DB entrys ?

I repeat for those unable to read:
Bartender
Do
Not
Invent
New
Bars.
It make *default* bars available to you in the ways you want it.
What you are asking for is in no way related to Bartender intended goals.

I love BT4, been using it since release.

I have looked though these comments and noticed that 2 people have requested an option to have a bar show Quest Items. Only to be shot down.

I was wondering if you would reconsider, now that blizzard has their own (kind of not really a bar). It would be really nice to have some hot keys for certain quest items such bombs and what not, especially for dailies. Without having yet another addon.

Thanks for a great addon.

When I am rearranging my bars in BT4 and I choose enable Micro bar I get an error. I can unlock it and movie it but I cannot see it or change its size or anything. The error I get is below...

Date: 2010-01-06 04:12:04
ID: 3
Error occured in: Global
Count: 1
Message: ..\AddOns\Bartender4\ButtonBar.lua line 209:
attempt to call method 'ClearSetPoint' (a nil value)
Debug:
(tail call): ?
Bartender4\ButtonBar.lua:209: UpdateButtonLayout()
Bartender4\MicroMenu.lua:98: ApplyConfig()
Bartender4\MicroMenu.lua:71: ApplyConfig()
Bartender4\MicroMenu.lua:67:
Bartender4\MicroMenu.lua:36
(tail call): ?
[C]: ?
[string "safecall Dispatcher[1]"]:9:
[string "safecall Dispatcher[1]"]:5
(tail call): ?
...AddOns\Bartender4\libs\AceAddon-3.0\AceAddon-3.0.lua:531:
...AddOns\Bartender4\libs\AceAddon-3.0\AceAddon-3.0.lua:524
(tail call): ?
Bartender4\Bartender4.lua:389:
Bartender4\Bartender4.lua:382
(tail call): ?
[C]: ?
[string "safecall Dispatcher[3]"]:9:
[string "safecall Dispatcher[3]"]:5
(tail call): ?
...nfig-3.0\AceConfigDialog-3.0\AceConfigDialog-3.0.lua:789:
...nfig-3.0\AceConfigDialog-3.0\AceConfigDialog-3.0.lua:609
(tail call): ?
[C]: ?
[string "safecall Dispatcher[3]"]:9:
[string "safecall Dispatcher[3]"]:5
(tail call): ?
...ace\AddOns\Bartender4\libs\AceGUI-3.0\AceGUI-3.0.lua:305: Fire()
...an\libs\AceGUI-3.0\widgets\AceGUIWidget-CheckBox.lua:50:
...an\libs\AceGUI-3.0\widgets\AceGUIWidget-CheckBox.lua:4

Just a quick feedback on a bug i discovered.

When you copy a profile from a char that is a druid for example and have configured it so that some bars show when you go bear and other dont, you wont be able to turn that off or configure it in any way when you copy that profile to a char that is not a druid or another other class that doesnt have stance bars.

If you disable the stance bar once, it keeps disappearing, if you try to re-enable it again. It does show up, when you unlock the frames, but is gone again, when you lock it again.
Only thing that seems to help is to delete all saved variables of bartender...

no failure notice shows up.

So I get this error when I make a bind using another addon called BindPad http://www.wowinterface.com/download...itemmacro.html

The error doesn't present right away..it happens when I sign in again after making a bind..

Date: 2010-01-02 19:50:15
ID: 1
Error occured in: Global
Count: 1
Message: ..\AddOns\Bartender4\ActionBars.lua line 175:
Usage: SaveBindings(1||2)
Debug:
(tail call): ?
(tail call): ?
[C]: SaveBindings()
Bartender4\ActionBars.lua:175: ReassignBindings()
Bartender4\ActionBars.lua:83:
Bartender4\ActionBars.lua:65
(tail call): ?
[C]: ?
[string "safecall Dispatcher[1]"]:9:
[string "safecall Dispatcher[1]"]:5
(tail call): ?
...\AddOns\AtlasLoot\Libs\AceAddon-3.0\AceAddon-3.0.lua:539: EnableAddon()
...\AddOns\AtlasLoot\Libs\AceAddon-3.0\AceAddon-3.0.lua:551: EnableAddon()
...\AddOns\AtlasLoot\Libs\AceAddon-3.0\AceAddon-3.0.lua:629:
...\AddOns\AtlasLoot\Libs\AceAddon-3.0\AceAddon-3.0.lua:615
[C]: LoadAddOn()
..\FrameXML\UIParent.lua:234: UIParentLoadAddOn()
..\FrameXML\UIParent.lua:257: CombatLog_LoadUI()
..\FrameXML\UIParent.lua:481:
..\FrameXML\UIParent.lua:453
AddOns:
Swatter, v5.7.4568 (KillerKoala)
AtlasLoot, vv5.09.02
BadBoy, v4.0.3.3
BadBoyCCleaner, v2.2.1
Bagnon, v2.12.3
BagnonForever, v1.1.2
BagnonTooltips, v
Bartender4, v4.4.2
BindingsReminder, v0.8-20400
BindPad, v2.2.2
Cellular, v3.3.002a
ChatTimestamps, v1.6
cMinimapCoordinates, v
CTMailMod, v3.300 (CTMod 3.3)
Decursive, v2.4.5.1
DoomCooldownPulse, v
HealBot, v3.3.0.2
InfoBar, v
Mapster, v1.3.3
OmniCC, v2.5.8
SimpleMouseoverTarget, v1.7
XPerl, v3.0.8
XPerlArcaneBar, v
XPerlPlayer, v
XPerlPlayerPet, v
XPerlTarget, v
XPerlTargetTarget, v
BlizRuntimeLib_enUS v3.3.0.30300 <us>
(ck=278)

You can use same hotkeys in different specs. Hotkeys are bound to bars, not specs. Even better, don't use Bartender hotkeys, if you don't want them to wanish mysteriously from time to time.
Similar issue down in the comments.

I'm having problems recently where when I update hotkeys in one spec it's changing the hotkeys in my other spec.

Is there something I can look for in order to prevent this from happening?

Or maybe the hotkeys have always been shared and I'm just imagining things , but it would be great if they were unique to the spec.

What I do is make sure each character is set to be using their own unique profile name and then select "Copy From" selection of the character I want that character's setup to be closest like, and then tweak from there. I love mods that offer profiling like B4 does.

Thank you!

Anyone have any ideas for an answer to my last question, below?

Don't use BT4 keybinds. At least I've solved it this way.
Five default Blizzard bars produce enough keybinds already. Just setup your UI so that you are using them for important stuff, and the rest for whatever is left.
I.e., my setup is this:
Bar4 - freely positioned on screen, for stuff that I'm clicking in combat, but too rare to keybind.

Bar10 - stuck to the far bottom-right, with things like Hearthstone and profession links - useful, but hardly essential.

Stack of bars down-right on screen, next to Bar10:
Bar9 (Not on all chars, only on mains - for stuff I hardly use at all)
StanceBar & Bar3 (Stance overlapping Bar3, so it looks like it is single bar)
Bar5 (Alt+# hotkeys for stuff that need fast access, but not too immportant to put on Bat1)
Bar1 (+Bar2+Bar6 to choose from by scrolling, F1-F12 hotkeys)

It is not a fix, it is default behavior of addon.
If you intentionally set all your chars to use same profile - you're the one to blame.

Wanted to add in also the following. Paging via forms does not affect other characters without those forms (or at least the characters I possess seem unaffected)(localized class condition). However, Visibility conditionals affect all classes regardless (globalized class condition). I am unsure what prompted the add-on maker to localize one set, but globalize the other. Hoping they enforce a localized class condition to visibility in one the later versions.

The other fix is simply making a new profile and assigning things that way for that class. I feel profiles should be an extension of design capacities. Not a work around for a given limitation in the code. Hence, why I am noting this.