Okay, been a while everyone, so I figure I'd drop a few words here on where CoFHCore and TE stand. OmniTools will not be ported to 1.6.x, but there's a reason for that.



CoFHCore may be split into a couple of mods and repurposed, I haven't decided on that yet. All of the individual parts (capes/skins, head drops, world gen, and other core functions) are all working correctly.



Thermal Expansion itself isn't in bad shape, but instead of porting 2.x up, I'm porting 3.0 backwards to sort of a middle ground. It's just easier and there are too many improvements. Having said that, the new BuildCraft API is causing the vast majority of the issues. CJ's new power system is, on the surface of it, a huge improvement over BC 3's implementation. However, the complete lack of flexibility afforded with the new system means that I can't do the same sorts of things as efficiently or effectively as I used to.



So here's what you are likely to see with the ported release of TE, short term:

-Machines with revamped mechanics

-Engines with revamped mechanics, 1 new engine

-Tiers of Redstone Energy Cells and Portable Tanks

-Tesseract improvements

-Strongboxes *might* make it in

-Panels *might* make it in



Unfortunately, Conduits and Fluiducts are going to be kicked to the curb for a while. We're looking into full ForgeMultiPart compatibility for them and I suspect it'll be a full rewrite from the ground up. Obviously this will also apply to the ItemDucts.



OmniTools is dead. There are too many APIs always in flux for me to want to keep that up as it sits, and pairing the OmniWrench and the Lexicon in such a fashion is sort of silly.



Instead, at some point, TE will get an automated and configurable Lexicon, and I'll bring back the OmniWrench as a standalone mod which is a fair bit easier to maintain.



Alright, and now I've saved the tough part for last, though I already alluded to it above. I'm no longer sold on using MJ as the basis for TE. I've already written a full energy API and I'm discussing with the team if we want to make the switch. Should this happen, we'll try and provide some sort of converter. This isn't a matter of unit disagreement, merely implementation details.



Sorry that I can't give an ETA, life is hectic and I just have tons of other demands taking my time. I also can't completely hand the code over to the new maintainers as it sits, since it's basically a mess.