Minetest logo

IRC log for #minetest-dev, 2014-02-13

| Channels | #minetest-dev index | Today | | Google Search | Plaintext

All times shown according to UTC.

Time Nick Message
00:15 MichaelRpdx http://pastebin.com/wNxiQ2RM
00:20 sapier interesting ... let me guess lock is held by 11988?
00:22 sapier1 joined #minetest-dev
00:24 MichaelRpdx and yeah, but what is 11988?
00:25 MichaelRpdx we're back to ???
00:25 MichaelRpdx I didn't see that earlier
00:25 sapier1 11988 is the messed up thread
00:25 MichaelRpdx yes, saw that.
00:26 sapier1 sorry but I need to get some sleep that information seems to be helpfull I'll check tomorrow
00:26 MichaelRpdx Sleeep is good.
00:27 sapier1 left #minetest-dev
00:31 Megaf joined #minetest-dev
00:34 cj joined #minetest-dev
00:40 Megaf joined #minetest-dev
00:49 deltib joined #minetest-dev
00:49 NakedFury joined #minetest-dev
01:11 Weedy_lappy joined #minetest-dev
02:09 hmmmmmm joined #minetest-dev
02:11 Anchakor1 joined #minetest-dev
02:11 Naked joined #minetest-dev
02:13 Neological joined #minetest-dev
02:14 deltib1 joined #minetest-dev
02:15 e1z0 joined #minetest-dev
02:16 Tesseract joined #minetest-dev
02:16 celeron55_ joined #minetest-dev
02:17 DemonRaiser joined #minetest-dev
02:18 salamanderrake joined #minetest-dev
02:19 troller joined #minetest-dev
02:19 Miner_48er joined #minetest-dev
02:20 blaise joined #minetest-dev
02:21 zat joined #minetest-dev
02:21 hmmmmm joined #minetest-dev
02:32 darkrose joined #minetest-dev
02:35 Gethiox joined #minetest-dev
02:35 OldCoder joined #minetest-dev
02:38 werwerwer joined #minetest-dev
02:39 salamanderrake joined #minetest-dev
02:41 NakedFury joined #minetest-dev
02:44 e1z0_ joined #minetest-dev
02:45 werwerwer joined #minetest-dev
02:47 Miner_48er joined #minetest-dev
02:49 Anchakor_ joined #minetest-dev
02:49 specing_ joined #minetest-dev
02:57 RealBadAngel joined #minetest-dev
02:59 specing_ joined #minetest-dev
02:59 salamanderrake joined #minetest-dev
03:00 khonkhortisan joined #minetest-dev
03:03 ImQ009 joined #minetest-dev
03:05 Taoki joined #minetest-dev
03:43 Exio4 joined #minetest-dev
04:23 VargaD joined #minetest-dev
04:34 troller joined #minetest-dev
05:23 Neological joined #minetest-dev
06:42 Gethiox2 joined #minetest-dev
07:03 e1z0_ joined #minetest-dev
08:16 xiong joined #minetest-dev
08:17 robmyers joined #minetest-dev
08:17 robmyers joined #minetest-dev
08:17 xiong joined #minetest-dev
08:26 cj joined #minetest-dev
08:52 mrtux joined #minetest-dev
08:53 darkrose joined #minetest-dev
09:15 darkrose joined #minetest-dev
09:15 darkrose joined #minetest-dev
09:44 Megaf joined #minetest-dev
09:45 proller joined #minetest-dev
10:23 grrk-bzzt joined #minetest-dev
10:23 darkrose joined #minetest-dev
10:38 tomreyn joined #minetest-dev
11:01 smoke_fumus joined #minetest-dev
11:02 elmux joined #minetest-dev
12:09 Megaf joined #minetest-dev
12:40 proller joined #minetest-dev
12:50 proller joined #minetest-dev
13:19 Zeitgeist_ joined #minetest-dev
13:49 werwerwer_ joined #minetest-dev
13:49 hmmmm joined #minetest-dev
14:07 zat joined #minetest-dev
14:21 BrandonReese joined #minetest-dev
14:43 Amaz joined #minetest-dev
14:50 Yepoleb joined #minetest-dev
15:28 Megaf joined #minetest-dev
15:35 Gethiox joined #minetest-dev
15:45 deltib joined #minetest-dev
16:04 Jordach joined #minetest-dev
16:09 Megaf Folks, I'm looking at the code trying to find an existing way to implement control via arrow keys instead of mouse, but I can't find anything very clear, can anyone help?
16:09 proller joined #minetest-dev
16:11 OldCoder joined #minetest-dev
16:34 Calinou joined #minetest-dev
16:48 proller joined #minetest-dev
16:59 PilzAdam joined #minetest-dev
17:04 us|0gb joined #minetest-dev
17:04 us|0gb joined #minetest-dev
17:11 CiaranG Megaf: Try this: https://github.com/CiaranG/minetest/commit​/dbb97e12a9a6b92bccdb661cdab772868d01af7c
17:13 CiaranG (in other words, there is no existing way, but if you build with that it will do it)
17:13 Megaf CiaranG: That's really cool
17:13 Megaf So, that's is not part of minetest yet
17:13 CiaranG No
17:14 Megaf CiaranG: did you request a pull?
17:14 CiaranG No. There is a problem that I would want to resolve before I thought about that.
17:15 CiaranG If you map the left/right mouse click to something else (i.e. a key) you can't then map it back to the mouse button (because the gui captures the mouse clicks)
17:15 CiaranG (of course, you could just change the config file to map it back)
17:15 CiaranG But it's good enough for what I needed it for, so I haven't tried to fix that yet. It's probably very easy.
17:16 Megaf CiaranG: did you see my topic?
17:16 CiaranG No?
17:16 Megaf https://forum.minetest.net/viewtopic.php?id=8552
17:17 CiaranG Ha
17:17 Megaf so, it would be great if you help us
17:18 CiaranG Well, I already did, see above ;)
17:20 CiaranG All you have to do is convince someone to merge it I guess
17:22 CiaranG Or testing it would help, if you're able to build?
17:30 Megaf I am, I have a fork too
17:30 Megaf Im going to used that on my fork and see how it works
17:53 Miner_48er joined #minetest-dev
17:58 us_0gb joined #minetest-dev
17:58 us|0gb joined #minetest-dev
17:58 Megaf Ok, thank you CiaranG
17:59 proller joined #minetest-dev
18:40 zat joined #minetest-dev
18:43 sapier joined #minetest-dev
18:48 EvergreenTree joined #minetest-dev
18:48 EvergreenTree joined #minetest-dev
18:50 Selat joined #minetest-dev
18:56 grrk-bzzt joined #minetest-dev
19:05 sapier MichaelRpdx: are you there?
19:09 Robby joined #minetest-dev
19:16 celeron55_ CiaranG!?
19:16 celeron55_ the first freaking contributor to the project of all time is here
19:17 sapier yes he's already here for some time ;-)
19:18 sapier celeron55 do you have a opinion to making player client version available through modapi?
19:18 proller joined #minetest-dev
19:19 celeron55_ sapier: for what purpose?
19:21 sapier well it's primary for debugging purposes but could be usefull for statistics and player information about best version to use with a server too. Right now it's disabled for non debug builds in my pull request
19:22 sapier I use this feature to create a benchmarking mod for various network protocols. Of course that's nothing to be used on a real server
19:24 sapier as ShadowNinja already intended to abuse it for player blocking I have mixed feelings about making it generaly availabe
19:27 celeron55_ player blocking?
19:27 celeron55_ what for? the engine already does that and it's its responsibility anyway
19:28 sapier well I understood something like block clients beeing not official minetest client ... I don't like ideas like that
19:28 celeron55_ what
19:28 celeron55_ that's ridiculous
19:28 sapier true that's why I already limited it to debug version only
19:30 celeron55_ anyway i don't like that separated major/minor/whatever thing; and also it should contain the name of the client
19:31 sapier you have a mixed mode version in version string
19:31 celeron55_ for statistics purposes a string like "Minetest 0.4.9-git" would be completely fine and probably preferred
19:31 sapier I need the version numbers in core
19:32 celeron55_ what do you do with them?
19:32 sapier right now we have no way to workaround the different client behaviour because of someone didn't realize he changed behaviour in a way that'd have required bumping protocol version
19:32 sapier basicaly any client as of 0.4.7 does behave slightly different
19:33 sapier I can't proove it but I have reason to believe some tablet clients behave different too
19:33 celeron55_ clients having subtle changes without version changes has always been the case
19:33 celeron55_ why is it a problem now?
19:34 celeron55_ do you realize you break all what was beautiful about minetest versioning with that thing
19:35 sapier I do see the risk but on the other hand those changes we didn't realize by time to bump protocol version stop us from beeing compatible
19:35 celeron55_ break compatibility then
19:36 celeron55_ and change things so that both of these apply: 1) we don't need to expose client version for any functional purpose, 2) such breakage is 100 times less likely to occur in the future
19:36 sapier that's easy to say but usually results in "you can't change that thing because of noone can connect after it" ... for things you have to break to fix even worse things ... resulting in blocking dev
19:37 celeron55_ by making that change you just make everything super obscure and nobody can anymore know what works and what doesn't, and also you effectively lock out non-minetest clients due to arbitrary version checks
19:38 celeron55_ i don't approve any of this
19:38 sapier well it's already very obscure
19:38 celeron55_ yeah, so let's make it more obscure
19:38 celeron55_ great idea
19:39 sapier I don't think it's more obsucre to know what's gonna happen, right now it may or may not work and you neigter can predict nor workaround minor issues
19:39 celeron55_ i'll say you are only allowed to add as many lines as you remove for this
19:40 sapier ?
19:40 sapier what do you mean?
19:41 celeron55_ i mean i don't like making it more compicated
19:41 celeron55_ +l
19:43 sapier well if you don't want the version number I'm not gonna add it but I recommend bumping min protocol version to 23 too as old clients are incompatible and there's no way to fix the basic issues without breaking compatibility
19:43 MichaelRpdx sapier here now
19:45 sapier working around issues by protocol version which might have been changed on breaking behaviour or not is at best a ugly hack not a solution
19:45 celeron55_ i think it is a right time for breaking compatibility and making a clean solution for the current time and the future
19:46 sapier actully I thought we wanted to do this in final decision about network protocol
19:46 celeron55_ what's the news on that then?
19:47 sapier right now we >can< handle old clients in almost 99% of cases by abusing protocol version to do compatibility ... but that's as ugly as using client version
19:48 sapier nothing new because everyone lost interest and I'm still tracking down some strange bugs ... some jthread relate some in there forever
19:49 celeron55_ i think this is going to a really bad direction
19:49 celeron55_ we should be making things more simple and robust, not more complicated and unstable
19:49 Megaf indeed
19:49 sapier well removing the big logs is prone to make it unstable but it's necessary
19:49 sapier locks
19:50 sapier and right now I'm the only one really looking for those issues ... most of people do android development only
19:52 sapier ok just to make sure, is it commonly accepted to bump min protocol version?
19:55 sapier guys I can't do this without clear position of at least some core devs
19:56 Megaf sapier: Can't you create o poll or something like it?
19:56 celeron55_ no it isn't accepted, without being sure that the chance is then taken to improve everything made possible by it
19:56 celeron55_ but if that is done, then it is absolutely accepted
19:57 sapier "improve everything made possible" ... it'd be more easy to rewrite it in total then to guarantee this "I want everything and now" demand
19:57 celeron55_ (and if it isn't, then that's just because of ignorance)
19:58 sapier especally as there's noone to review any changes
19:58 celeron55_ well i think everyone can agree that we don't have the resources to maintain complicated things or to cause any more complication to anything, and neither do we have resources for breaking compatibility and improving everything
19:59 celeron55_ so maybe the only real alternative then is to break compatibility and hope that it frees developer time for productive things
19:59 celeron55_ in the long run
19:59 sapier ok so why didn't you stop adding a insane complicated thing like texture downloading and https?
19:59 sapier -s
19:59 sapier both requires client/server handshake as server needs to know about client beeing ready to receive further information
19:59 celeron55_ me? i've done and looked at absolutely nothing in the past month
20:00 celeron55_ (on the other hand, i've made great progress in an another project of mine)
20:00 sapier exactly but now as I try to fix the issues added in this time you seem to expect me to fix everything bad at once ... at least that's what I understand
20:01 sapier everytime I fix a issue I stumble into another one beeing in there for quite some time but beeing hidden of another one
20:02 CiaranG celeron55_: yes, me. hey :)
20:02 sapier but that's something different. what I'm interested atm is shall I remove compatibility handling or not
20:03 sapier it uses protocol version same way it'd use a version number so it's basicaly no difference
20:03 celeron55_ whatever answer i give, it's a bad answer
20:03 celeron55_ maybe everything is going to end horribly and we should stop before it's too late
20:03 celeron55_ it's done now
20:04 sapier well none is as bad as not deciding at all that's just "I don't wanna decide because of I want to be able to blame you for it later"
20:04 celeron55_ if the compatibility is removed, then we blame the ones that made compatibility too hard, right? 8)
20:05 celeron55_ (which is me)
20:05 sapier actually the last months I have the feeling I'm made reponsible for everything beeing wrong in mt ;-P
20:07 sapier I'm gonna open up a poll in forum ... I hope core devs will respond
20:07 celeron55_ at least you expose every possible problem with whatever you do and then ice it up with a big chunk of complicated code that mostly makes it worse
20:07 celeron55_ or at least that's how it looks like
20:08 sapier well adding client/server init handling can't be done with no code ... there was none before
20:08 sapier ok it was there by using a bunch of bool variables to form "some sort of client state"
20:08 celeron55_ wasn't the previous "no code" proof that it can? 8)
20:09 sapier well that's why it didn't work e.g. uninitialized players in world, lost player models on player object sent prior model transmission, chat messages not sent to those who should receive it
20:09 sapier basicaly it's been your idea to fix the player standing in world
20:14 celeron55_ should we start a 0.5.0 branch that aims for more stability and simplicity with no compatibility, and kind of opportunistically imporve things on it until there doesn't seem to be more to do (which is when it's released)
20:14 celeron55_ and give that enough time
20:14 sapier well I don't believe that's gonna happen anytime soon there's way to much to do
20:14 sapier e.g. splitting env lock
20:15 celeron55_ what's not going to happen?
20:15 sapier and community is already split I don't believe splitting it even more will improve situation
20:15 sapier "nutil there doesn't seem to be more"
20:15 celeron55_ that's not a split; it's a way larger changes are usually developedd
20:15 celeron55_ -d
20:16 celeron55_ well ffs i can decide when it's done if that's the problem
20:16 celeron55_ seems like the smallest of problems
20:20 celeron55_ would *you* be fine with that branch?
20:20 celeron55_ (there's nobody else here anyway)
20:20 sapier well I don't know what to do there
20:20 sapier https://forum.minetest.net/edit.php?id=129782
20:21 * VanessaE peeks in
20:21 sapier imho this feels like a second freeminder branch ... I did compare it to current master yesterday ... it's argonizing how much we have differed, both have fixes in there the other one doesn't have (not counting controversial things)
20:22 VanessaE sapier:  missing player models and/or player nametags
20:24 VanessaE if it was up to me, and I was the one making this decision, I would side with c55 here - start a new branch, break compatibility, but rewrite the entire network protocol from scratch if that's what it takes to "get it right", make that the official code when the time is right.
20:26 sapier if I'd believe it was only about network protocol I'd do it but there'll be package format, threading data format ... all of those issues which regularly pop up
20:26 sapier And I can't do all of them on my own
20:31 sapier well right now we have a draw in that poll ... but doesn't seem to draw a lot of interest from core devs
20:35 sapier sometimes I understand why proller and xyz have left
20:47 celeron55_ sapier: you linked to the edit page of your post; this is the actual post: https://forum.minetest.net/viewtopic.php?id=8571
20:48 sapier thanks, fixed it in #minetest forgot to fix it here ... sorry
20:48 us|0gb joined #minetest-dev
20:49 us_0gb joined #minetest-dev
20:50 VanessaE sapier: regarding your current branch, where do we stand?  is that going to be pushed upstream then?
20:50 VanessaE (the one I've had under test)
20:50 sapier no not without a decision
20:50 VanessaE ok
20:51 VanessaE do you have that link handy to that compatibility table you had worked out?
20:53 sapier https://gist.github.com/sapier/8907170
20:58 EvergreenTree Idea that I'm willing to do: Give the furnace fire an animated texture?
20:58 EvergreenTree instead of that static flame image
20:59 EvergreenTree Anyone think it should be done?
20:59 VanessaE https://github.com/VanessaE/animated_furnace'
20:59 VanessaE https://github.com/VanessaE/animated_furnace
21:00 VanessaE Dan already did it (that's just my copy if it)
21:01 EvergreenTree ah
21:01 EvergreenTree Well, I can integrate and merge it then.
21:02 VanessaE but that's a minetest_game issue, not a core issue like what sapier and c55 are talking about
21:04 EvergreenTree Well, sorry if I'm breaking the discussion
21:05 VanessaE noit's okay
21:05 VanessaE it's a good idea
21:06 sapier discussion fell a sleep some minutes ago so don't bother EvergreenTree
21:06 VanessaE textures and code in that mod are suitable for minetest_game, so go for it :)
21:06 VanessaE s/don't bother/don't worry about it/
21:06 EvergreenTree Okay
21:06 EvergreenTree Thanks
21:07 EvergreenTree I might make my own texture for it
21:08 VanessaE ok
21:09 EvergreenTree I'm guessing he used the default animated fire texture for it
21:14 VanessaE I'm not sure how he made that texture actuall
21:14 VanessaE +t
21:14 VanessaE -t+y
21:26 sapier https://github.com/minetest/minetest/pull/1142 this one seems to get more and more important, MichaelRpdx's problem seems to be a luajit issue too ... this time it's not in mainmenu but in generic server startup
21:35 proller joined #minetest-dev
21:40 sapier well if noone complains I'm gonna push 1142 in about an hour
21:54 VanessaE sapier: it seems that "out with the old, in with the new" is the general consensus on your poll so far.
22:02 kahrl joined #minetest-dev
22:11 VanessaE bbl
22:25 us_0gb joined #minetest-dev
22:30 rsiska joined #minetest-dev
22:31 sapier ok pushing #1142 now
23:03 sapier left #minetest-dev
23:07 ShadowBot joined #minetest-dev
23:53 EvergreenTree joined #minetest-dev
23:57 Miner_48er joined #minetest-dev

| Channels | #minetest-dev index | Today | | Google Search | Plaintext