Minetest logo

IRC log for #minetest-dev, 2019-02-26

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

All times shown according to UTC.

Time Nick Message
00:01 ANAND joined #minetest-dev
00:29 calcul0n joined #minetest-dev
00:54 p_gimeno joined #minetest-dev
01:25 kaeza joined #minetest-dev
01:32 paramat joined #minetest-dev
01:34 paramat well, first i'll bisect to confirm if it is that commit
01:57 ssieb joined #minetest-dev
02:00 p_gimeno it's faster to check that commit and the one before :)
02:08 paramat heh, yes that's what i'm doing :)
02:09 paramat bisecting from a range of 2 commits
02:11 p_gimeno lol
02:16 benrob0329 joined #minetest-dev
02:21 kaeza joined #minetest-dev
02:26 paramat confirmed the cause is the suspected commit, i might attempt a revert PR
02:30 paramat doing that now
03:08 paramat not too bad. done #8288
03:08 ShadowBot https://github.com/minetest/minetest/issues/8288 -- Revert CSM particles commit to fix bug for 5.0.0 by paramat
03:39 paramat joined #minetest-dev
03:58 Cornelia joined #minetest-dev
04:17 paramat joined #minetest-dev
04:24 paramat merging #8288 build fails are due to translation thingy
04:24 ShadowBot https://github.com/minetest/minetest/issues/8288 -- Revert CSM particles commit to fix bug for 5.0.0 by paramat
04:32 paramat nerzhul (for when you are around) are you able to help with #8284 ?
04:32 ShadowBot https://github.com/minetest/minetest/issues/8284 -- Can’t compile due to weblate, translation issue
04:33 ANAND paramat: Updated #8260 with your suggestion
04:33 ShadowBot https://github.com/minetest/minetest/issues/8260 -- README: Remove references to Minecraft and InfiniMiner by ClobberXD
04:35 paramat ok
05:02 lumberJ joined #minetest-dev
05:34 benrob0329 joined #minetest-dev
06:02 GreenDimond_ joined #minetest-dev
06:03 Cornelia joined #minetest-dev
07:23 proller joined #minetest-dev
07:31 Cornelia joined #minetest-dev
07:37 Cornelia joined #minetest-dev
07:53 nerzhul seriously
07:54 nerzhul 01cd63bd3bca0192dab2834faf414b022706a77e is unacceptable.
07:54 nerzhul re commiting. We should find a fix.
07:54 nerzhul it should not be difficult to find the problem the client part is not very difficult to understand
07:54 nerzhul the problem is in that part
07:59 Unarelith joined #minetest-dev
08:41 Unarelith_ joined #minetest-dev
08:58 proller joined #minetest-dev
09:05 Darcidride joined #minetest-dev
09:06 nerzhul the PR fix #8289
09:06 ShadowBot https://github.com/minetest/minetest/issues/8289 -- Fix particle spawners not visible since CSM spawner implementation by nerzhul
09:07 nerzhul this is the real way to fix it.
09:07 nerzhul dropping a whole feature is not the solution when the problem is just the registration of a id...
09:11 proller joined #minetest-dev
09:30 rocky1138 joined #minetest-dev
09:44 Ritchie joined #minetest-dev
09:59 Beton joined #minetest-dev
11:47 Fixer joined #minetest-dev
11:53 proller joined #minetest-dev
12:01 proller joined #minetest-dev
12:26 Unarelith_ joined #minetest-dev
12:26 Fixer_ joined #minetest-dev
12:27 xerox123_4 joined #minetest-dev
12:28 ANAND_ joined #minetest-dev
12:28 cheapie_ joined #minetest-dev
12:29 fluxflux_ joined #minetest-dev
12:29 proller joined #minetest-dev
12:31 Lunatrius joined #minetest-dev
12:32 bobby joined #minetest-dev
12:39 Lia joined #minetest-dev
12:41 Unarelith__ joined #minetest-dev
13:02 T4im joined #minetest-dev
13:26 Taoki joined #minetest-dev
13:29 Unarelith__ joined #minetest-dev
13:32 Wuzzy joined #minetest-dev
14:16 Unarelith joined #minetest-dev
14:31 kaeptmblaubaer joined #minetest-dev
15:02 jas_ i would agree, if i were in a position to
15:20 calcul0n joined #minetest-dev
15:45 p_gimeno joined #minetest-dev
15:46 p_gimeno joined #minetest-dev
16:04 calcul0n joined #minetest-dev
16:14 entuland joined #minetest-dev
16:42 ANAND_ joined #minetest-dev
16:50 calcul0n joined #minetest-dev
17:40 benrob0329 joined #minetest-dev
18:13 Lone-Star joined #minetest-dev
18:15 Beton joined #minetest-dev
18:24 Lone-Star joined #minetest-dev
19:09 ssieb joined #minetest-dev
19:09 ANAND #8034 is no longer WIP, and is ready for testing and review
19:10 ShadowBot https://github.com/minetest/minetest/issues/8034 -- Disable auto-setting server as favorite on connect; display "Add Favorite" button by ClobberXD
19:17 ANAND_ joined #minetest-dev
19:18 entuland_ joined #minetest-dev
19:21 Lunatrius joined #minetest-dev
19:22 Taoki joined #minetest-dev
19:30 fwhcat joined #minetest-dev
19:47 ichoquo0Aigh9ie joined #minetest-dev
19:50 xerox123_ joined #minetest-dev
20:07 proller joined #minetest-dev
20:17 ichoquo0Aigh9ie joined #minetest-dev
20:24 paramat joined #minetest-dev
20:27 paramat nerzhul reverting a commit by yourself is not acceptable, especially at the 'We should find a fix.' stage. the first revert should stay until your PR is tested
20:28 paramat we are very close to a release, your fix may cause unforseen issues, the safest solution is a revert, then you can make your fix after release. the feature is not important and CSM is unfinished
20:29 reductum joined #minetest-dev
20:31 paramat we have reverted a few other things that caused bugs, due to doing this being the least risky solution, this situation is no different
20:32 paramat you could have based your PR on the reverted code, it would have been no more difficult, then the revert would have been a backup solution
20:33 paramat i will recommit the initial revert then you can rebase your PR
20:33 VanessaE paramat: so you want to revert the reverted revert?
20:35 Sokomine joined #minetest-dev
20:37 paramat but anyway, we all make impulsive mistakes, i hope you admit your mistake and apologise ;)
20:38 paramat sfan5 could you look at nerz's PR? i remember you considered a proper fix non trivial
20:39 sfan5 that was a guess
20:39 sfan5 but sure
20:45 paramat heh yes
20:46 paramat i'm concerned this is too risky and we won't have enough time to test. 5.1.0 will likely be soon after so the proper fix won't be far off. ugh
20:47 sfan5 not every code is buggy, I don't think risk is a concern here
20:47 p_gimeno even 5.0.1
20:59 paramat i'm not saying the PR is buggy, but we have decided several times recently to apply the low risk solution due to how close release is, this is no different. so yes risk is a huge concern at this stage, obviously
21:12 paramat but, i won't revert yet, as that would then break this latest PR, even though we 'should'
21:27 Icedream joined #minetest-dev
21:41 paramat should a build warning be considered a blocker? #8292 i'll make a PR
21:41 ShadowBot https://github.com/minetest/minetest/issues/8292 -- Warning about “writing to an object of type 'struct NoiseParams' with no trivial copy-assignment” in file src/noise.cpp when compiling
21:54 paramat i can fix one warning but have no idea about this one #8291
21:54 ShadowBot https://github.com/minetest/minetest/issues/8291 -- Warning about out-of-bounds offset in src/util/srp.cpp when compiling
21:58 paramat hm suddenly lots of blockers, i can see release slipping another week
22:07 nerzhul test my pr.
22:08 nerzhul it's just working and restoring the behaviour you got by reverting the feature PR.
22:08 nerzhul build warning are not intended to be blocker paramat
22:10 nerzhul i just registered particlespawner properly. the problem in the original pr is the mapper between server & client ids
22:11 nerzhul it's a wrong idea due to another code part which requires that ID but doesn't know about it. i just merged the two  behaviour by using a uint64 with lower values (u32) for server part, like before, and upper parts for client ids
22:23 paramat it's mostly your responsibility to thoroughly test it, since you are promoting a risky situation. understandably i don't much feel like testing it
22:25 paramat and yes i somewhat agree a warning is not a blocker, removing labels ...
22:58 Unarelith_ joined #minetest-dev
23:29 entuland_ joined #minetest-dev
23:36 GreenDimond joined #minetest-dev
23:50 benrob0329 joined #minetest-dev

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