| Time |
Nick |
Message |
| 00:17 |
|
proller__ joined #minetest-dev |
| 00:49 |
|
vexyl joined #minetest-dev |
| 01:08 |
|
AntumD joined #minetest-dev |
| 02:10 |
|
AndroBuilder_ joined #minetest-dev |
| 02:59 |
|
Gael-de-Sailly joined #minetest-dev |
| 03:03 |
|
CBugDCoder joined #minetest-dev |
| 03:07 |
|
YuGiOhJCJ joined #minetest-dev |
| 03:27 |
|
proller joined #minetest-dev |
| 04:18 |
|
Sokomine joined #minetest-dev |
| 04:29 |
|
ssieb joined #minetest-dev |
| 05:23 |
|
proller joined #minetest-dev |
| 06:02 |
ANAND |
The fact that setting_get() / _set() has been deprecated in favour of setting:get() / :set() needs to be updated in the dev wiki |
| 06:03 |
ANAND |
There's literally no mention of the new methods in the whole wiki |
| 06:17 |
ANAND |
Actually, I've got the method names wrong myself! |
| 06:43 |
|
fwhcat joined #minetest-dev |
| 09:39 |
|
Krock joined #minetest-dev |
| 09:54 |
Krock |
Fix for not run callbacks on player leave: https://pastebin.com/raw/BkbkRiR7 |
| 09:54 |
Krock |
brb. Will announce the push later |
| 10:16 |
sfan5 |
ANAND: generally the reference you'll want to use is lua_api.txt |
| 10:42 |
ANAND |
sfan5, ok |
| 10:44 |
|
proller joined #minetest-dev |
| 10:50 |
|
Fixer joined #minetest-dev |
| 11:33 |
|
proller joined #minetest-dev |
| 11:34 |
|
ensonic joined #minetest-dev |
| 11:41 |
|
proller joined #minetest-dev |
| 11:42 |
|
fwhcat joined #minetest-dev |
| 11:51 |
|
proller joined #minetest-dev |
| 11:55 |
|
proller joined #minetest-dev |
| 11:58 |
|
proller joined #minetest-dev |
| 11:58 |
|
Wuzzy joined #minetest-dev |
| 12:09 |
|
proller joined #minetest-dev |
| 12:13 |
Krock |
Will push https://pastebin.com/raw/BkbkRiR7 in 15 minutes |
| 12:13 |
Krock |
and afterwards merging #7319 |
| 12:13 |
ShadowBot |
https://github.com/minetest/minetest/issues/7319 -- Camera: Improve subpixel movement by SmallJoker |
| 12:28 |
|
proller joined #minetest-dev |
| 12:30 |
Krock |
pushing |
| 12:53 |
nerzhul |
thanks sfan5, your comment is just real ! |
| 13:27 |
|
fwhcat joined #minetest-dev |
| 13:40 |
|
wowaname[m] joined #minetest-dev |
| 13:42 |
|
Beton joined #minetest-dev |
| 13:50 |
|
ensonic joined #minetest-dev |
| 13:54 |
|
warr[m] joined #minetest-dev |
| 14:31 |
|
Anchakor joined #minetest-dev |
| 14:37 |
|
paramat joined #minetest-dev |
| 14:42 |
paramat |
when's a good time for talking about 0.4.17? problem is we tend to lose nerzhul at the usual meeting time, so how about in 20mins or 1h20mins? i'm here for the rest of today. Krock nerzhul nore rubenwardy sfan5 Shara sofar |
| 14:42 |
sfan5 |
I don't mind doing it earlier |
| 14:42 |
rubenwardy |
I'm free |
| 14:43 |
Shara |
Here |
| 14:51 |
Krock |
Here |
| 14:51 |
Krock |
well, this will only make sense when nerzhul is online and has got time too :) |
| 14:54 |
Krock |
however, I won't be here in 1h20min but it could be held then surely too |
| 14:57 |
paramat |
our usual meeting time seems not good somehow, people tend to be quiet, maybe we're more awake in the daytime :) |
| 14:58 |
paramat |
1 more commit to backport in #6746 please can anyone do that? sfan5 or anyone? |
| 14:59 |
ShadowBot |
https://github.com/minetest/minetest/issues/6746 -- Backport 0.4 by sfan5 |
| 14:59 |
sfan5 |
I can do that later |
| 14:59 |
paramat |
MTG backports is ready |
| 14:59 |
paramat |
ok thanks |
| 15:00 |
paramat |
i think we should freeze today if possible |
| 15:01 |
Krock |
sounds good |
| 15:02 |
paramat |
hopefully nerz will appear in a while |
| 15:05 |
Shara |
I may or may not be here in an hour from now, but it's not too important. |
| 15:06 |
Shara |
I'm just happy if release can be soon :) |
| 15:15 |
|
BakerPrime joined #minetest-dev |
| 15:30 |
nerzhul |
i'm there but i will do some things outside |
| 15:31 |
nerzhul |
go ahead and release 0.4.17 please |
| 15:31 |
nerzhul |
i will provide the android builds after that |
| 15:31 |
nerzhul |
we cannot update translations for this release as they are based on master |
| 15:42 |
paramat |
ok |
| 15:43 |
Krock |
i.e. release today? |
| 15:45 |
rubenwardy |
I'm having crashes on my server |
| 15:48 |
rubenwardy |
ERROR[Main]: ServerError: AsyncErr: ServerThread::run Lua: Runtime error from mod 'default' in callback luaentity_Step(): ...test/minetest_stable/bin/../builtin/game/item_entity.lua:184: attempt to index local 'node' (a nil value) |
| 15:49 |
Krock |
backport branch? |
| 15:49 |
rubenwardy |
yeah |
| 15:50 |
Krock |
exists since https://github.com/minetest/minetest/commit/a59df5ef5 |
| 15:51 |
Krock |
the area is not loaded yet.. and that builtin item code looks like it was never really touched by any cleanup commit |
| 15:52 |
Krock |
local nn = node and node.name or "ignore" should solve the issue for you |
| 15:52 |
sfan5 |
isn't the point of get_node_or_nil to return nil when in ignore? |
| 15:53 |
Krock |
no, or_nil only returns nil when the node isn't loaded yet |
| 15:53 |
sfan5 |
oh |
| 15:53 |
paramat |
yeah it depends on unloaded/loaded, not 'ignore' |
| 15:54 |
Krock |
this commit worked fine in 0.5.x because there was a builtin item rewrite |
| 15:55 |
Krock |
so we should fallback either to "ignore", remove the item removal commit or backport the cleanups |
| 15:56 |
Krock |
brb |
| 15:58 |
paramat |
oops my error then |
| 15:58 |
sfan5 |
no that's my mistake |
| 15:58 |
sfan5 |
i backported these changes, I need to ensure they work with the older variant of the code |
| 15:59 |
sfan5 |
the question is what is supposed to happen to items in unloaded area? |
| 16:04 |
paramat |
this commit has to be in backports as it's part of a bunch of commits that allow world outside 'mapgen limit' to be playable if generated, this is necessary for server owners as a defence against attacks and to limit world size |
| 16:04 |
Shara |
It's basically the thing I've been waiting for 0.4.17 for... |
| 16:06 |
paramat |
in unloaded an item should have it's velocity and acceleration set to 0 as before, then i guess set 'node' to 'ignore' |
| 16:06 |
|
proller joined #minetest-dev |
| 16:07 |
paramat |
ugh i wish posts were not deleted in backport threads, that explained why those commits are needed |
| 16:08 |
sfan5 |
setting it to 'ignore' would delete the item though |
| 16:08 |
sfan5 |
well it wasn't me who deleted them |
| 16:10 |
paramat |
oh i see, that code is ok in 0.5. i wondered why i had been sloppy :) |
| 16:10 |
|
proller joined #minetest-dev |
| 16:21 |
|
ensonic joined #minetest-dev |
| 16:32 |
paramat |
i mean, set node to ignore at line 184, as Krock suggested |
| 16:33 |
paramat |
local nn = node and node.name or "ignore" |
| 16:34 |
paramat |
bu then, it might be ok to set vel/acc to zero and 'return' |
| 16:36 |
paramat |
yes the code previously 'return'ed, see the commit |
| 16:37 |
paramat |
and see 0.4.16 stable https://github.com/minetest/minetest/blob/80dc961d24e1964e25d57039ddb2ba639f9f4d22/builtin/game/item_entity.lua#L178 |
| 16:41 |
paramat |
if node == nil then (vel/acc = 0 etc. return) elseif node.name == "ignore" then (remove object etc. return) |
| 16:44 |
paramat |
oh, the posts weren't deleted, github just hid them, https://github.com/minetest/minetest/pull/6746#issuecomment-368584307 |
| 16:44 |
paramat |
github is so slow at page loading .. |
| 17:32 |
|
AntumDeluge joined #minetest-dev |
| 17:48 |
nerzhul |
Krock if i remember there were some C++03 compilation issues on 0.4.17 backport branch. Is this fixed ? |
| 17:53 |
Krock |
not yet. It was an issue with the Android build. The error log can be found in the logs to write a patch for it |
| 17:55 |
sfan5 |
nerzhul: do we want to fix this? |
| 17:56 |
sfan5 |
what i mean is, it would be lots of work to rewrite the code into c++03 |
| 17:56 |
sfan5 |
the easier way would be to just require c++11 and add -std=c++11 to android's makefile |
| 18:00 |
|
proller joined #minetest-dev |
| 18:23 |
|
reductum joined #minetest-dev |
| 18:24 |
|
proller joined #minetest-dev |
| 18:43 |
paramat |
is it important seeing how bad android is currently? if the new controls are not in backports then i can't see good reason to bother with android for 0.4.17 |
| 18:47 |
sfan5 |
would be nice to have it compile correctly |
| 18:47 |
sfan5 |
especially when fixinig it is fairly easy |
| 18:48 |
paramat |
oh ok |
| 18:51 |
|
proller joined #minetest-dev |
| 18:59 |
|
ensonic joined #minetest-dev |
| 19:02 |
Krock |
Was delayed by a bit. Are still people here to discuss the meeting points? |
| 19:03 |
sfan5 |
i'm still here |
| 19:04 |
Krock |
nerzhul, nore, paramat, rubenwardy, Shara, sofar - would you have some time to discuss the points listed here? https://github.com/orgs/minetest/teams/engine/discussions/10 |
| 19:06 |
Krock |
sfan5, so we should push a single commit to tell the Android build setup to use C++11? |
| 19:07 |
sfan5 |
yes |
| 19:07 |
Krock |
paramat, we MUST bother with Android. at least 70% of the daily players use it |
| 19:07 |
sfan5 |
paramat's (or our?) plan with android is to make it better for 0.5 and then move players to it |
| 19:08 |
sfan5 |
so don't /need/ to bother with 0.4.17 android |
| 19:08 |
Krock |
so if the players look for updates, they'll find them at the app store from another developer - expecting the issues are gone with the new 0.4.17 version |
| 19:10 |
sfan5 |
there is nothing players should "expect" from third-party apps |
| 19:10 |
Krock |
if there's a simple solution to fix compiling, then we should include that into the backports |
| 19:10 |
sfan5 |
and if they don't provide something it's not our fault |
| 19:10 |
Krock |
right |
| 19:10 |
sfan5 |
(i'm not arguing against including a compile fix, but e.g. backporting controls would be wasted time) |
| 19:10 |
paramat |
yes here. and yes i'm neutral about android, was jsut a random thought :) |
| 19:10 |
paramat |
*just |
| 19:11 |
Krock |
yes, the controls definitely belong into 0.5.x |
| 19:11 |
Shara |
controls change is more a feature than fix, even if addressing a long term problem |
| 19:11 |
paramat |
in fact, sorry for my comment, i feel we should bother with android for 0.4.17 |
| 19:14 |
nerzhul |
i don't see why we should push the android C++11 commit it's not the contract for 0.4.17 series |
| 19:14 |
nerzhul |
and for other users |
| 19:14 |
nerzhul |
porting C++11 to C++03 is not difficult on the problematic parts |
| 19:15 |
Krock |
in this case we'll end up initializing the variables noted in https://pastebin.com/raw/j4mjniaq in the constructor |
| 19:15 |
|
lumberJ joined #minetest-dev |
| 19:16 |
Krock |
does anyone have a working android build system to make and test the patch? |
| 19:17 |
Krock |
the errors seem quite obvious. I could do a patch but not test it until I've set up the android build on this system |
| 19:26 |
|
proller joined #minetest-dev |
| 19:27 |
Wayward_One |
I do |
| 19:28 |
Fixer |
i feel sorry for android users in some sense |
| 19:31 |
Krock |
Wayward_One, got a patch for you to test |
| 19:31 |
Wayward_One |
Okay |
| 19:32 |
Krock |
*diff. https://pastebin.com/raw/UA5a8Y3m |
| 19:32 |
Krock |
my compiler is still running. It's possible that I've made a typo somewhere |
| 19:34 |
Krock |
paramat, would you mind testing the suggested change for item_entity.lua so we can ensure its' working alright? |
| 19:35 |
paramat |
hmm yes ok |
| 19:35 |
Krock |
or is rubenwardy using a patch on his server already to confirm it? |
| 19:37 |
rubenwardy |
not yet |
| 19:37 |
rubenwardy |
been doing coursework |
| 19:37 |
rubenwardy |
which is also the Minetest contentdb |
| 19:39 |
Krock |
Wayward_One, the diff works here. Any results yet? |
| 19:39 |
Krock |
sorry -forgot to ask. Would you have some time to test? :) |
| 19:46 |
sfan5 |
paramat: "And this proposal is unlikely to happen or be accepted." how do you come to this conclusion? |
| 19:46 |
Krock |
personal option formulated as general statement for the entire dev team |
| 19:46 |
sfan5 |
I'm seeing one coredev clearly against and one tending to "against", rest neutral or no opinion |
| 19:47 |
sfan5 |
Krock: yes, I often have this impression when I read paramat's comments |
| 19:49 |
Krock |
I'm not a fan of this style either but unlike other contributors I interpret them as personal opinion |
| 19:53 |
paramat |
? where's that quote from |
| 19:53 |
paramat |
happy to retract if i was wrong |
| 19:55 |
paramat |
and no, unless i make a mistake i only write that when i know many are against something |
| 19:55 |
paramat |
can you link to where i wrote that? |
| 19:55 |
Wayward_One |
Krock: yes, i was just testing it :) ran into a small problem though, most likely on my end, so i'll have to troubleshoot when i get home |
| 19:56 |
Krock |
thanks a lot for testing. I'd be glad if you could provide more detailed information about the problem as soon you've got time :) |
| 19:57 |
sfan5 |
paramat: #7303 your post 17m ago |
| 19:57 |
ShadowBot |
https://github.com/minetest/minetest/issues/7303 -- WIP: Begin discord rich presence by Dumbeldor |
| 19:57 |
paramat |
btw Krock are you -1 for discord? your comment seems possibly to be disapproval |
| 19:57 |
Krock |
I didn't state any direct disapproval and only threw in some ideas about it |
| 19:58 |
Krock |
if it were a disapproval I'd :-1: or state it as "I disapprove" |
| 19:58 |
Krock |
I'm not against it as long the implementation is KISS |
| 19:59 |
paramat |
ah found it |
| 19:59 |
Krock |
whereas it can't get much simpler than how it currently is if I look at the Discord API correctly |
| 20:00 |
paramat |
hmm well i wrote that because it seems unlikely, whenever have we added a feature agreeing that core dev won't work on it? we're obliged to work on everything, otherwise the feature would be poorly maintained |
| 20:02 |
sfan5 |
see my proposal, it's pretty handy that this feature is optional |
| 20:02 |
sfan5 |
so if you don't enable it, no related code will even be compiled |
| 20:04 |
paramat |
ok. but is it acceptable to add code that we are stating we (core devs) will never maintain? seems unacceptable |
| 20:05 |
paramat |
and of course, if a feature is that low priority it's probably not worth adding |
| 20:08 |
paramat |
ok updated my post to add (in my opinon...) |
| 20:12 |
Krock |
paramat, a lot stuff is unmaintained by us *looks at the rendering part* and we actually rely largely on PRs which solve these issues |
| 20:13 |
Krock |
so I don't see a problem with adding this Discord PR, which can be opt-out anyway easily |
| 20:14 |
Krock |
.. or even remove it from the code if it stays broken for months |
| 20:16 |
paramat |
we still spend time on rendering stuff |
| 20:17 |
paramat |
there's more to the discord PR than dev time to maintain, there are other reasons to avoid it, such as it being completely useless code bloat |
| 20:24 |
sfan5 |
that's highly subjective |
| 20:25 |
paramat |
yes |
| 20:25 |
Krock |
these few kilobytes which aren't even compiled without the CMake setting set to "true" does not hurt anyone. We've also got redis and postgresql support - "only server will need it". Same for the discord PR: "only discord users will need it" |
| 20:25 |
Krock |
but still we've got redis and postgresql support |
| 20:26 |
paramat |
'does not hurt anyone' is not enough reason to add a feature, there has to be some benefit :) |
| 20:26 |
Krock |
neither is the "code bloat" coming from that particular file a major issue |
| 20:26 |
paramat |
and it will hurt devs by taking up time and maintenance ;) |
| 20:27 |
paramat |
the feature doesn't justify a single line in my opinion, it's a stupid social network gimmick |
| 20:29 |
Krock |
"time and maintenance" in reality this would rather look like the following situation: 1) a new issue regarding feature XY not working 2) time passes 3) someone writes the PR for it to get it working again |
| 20:29 |
Krock |
whereas "someone" is usually a person who is affected by that problem |
| 20:29 |
paramat |
well, it seems not worth it to me |
| 20:30 |
Krock |
okay |
| 20:31 |
paramat |
we can see that most core devs are really 'meh' about this and see it as near-useless, in these situations the right thing to do is -1, for simplicity and prioritisation. devs are being too soft :] |
| 20:53 |
paramat |
btw, i've marked some issues with no core dev interest for 2 years as 'possible close', please can core devs go through these and add their opinions? |
| 20:53 |
paramat |
i'm sure many were just missed by core devs so i bumped them |
| 21:00 |
paramat |
these will be closed eventually if there is no core dev interest |
| 21:39 |
|
YuGiOhJCJ joined #minetest-dev |
| 22:30 |
|
Taoki joined #minetest-dev |
| 22:41 |
|
ircSparky joined #minetest-dev |
| 23:07 |
|
paramat joined #minetest-dev |
| 23:09 |
paramat |
rubenwardy do you have a way to reproduce that item_entity crash? so i can test my suggested code? |
| 23:09 |
rubenwardy |
set the limit really low |
| 23:09 |
rubenwardy |
drop an entitiy |
| 23:10 |
rubenwardy |
that's how it happens on CTF |
| 23:10 |
rubenwardy |
maybe |
| 23:10 |
paramat |
'limit'? |
| 23:10 |
rubenwardy |
mapgen limit |
| 23:11 |
rubenwardy |
happens every few hours on my server |
| 23:11 |
paramat |
ok, hmm |
| 23:12 |
paramat |
interesting, if you drop an item into the ignore at world edge it should be deleted in the ignore before getting to 'unloaded' |
| 23:12 |
paramat |
i might try dropping an item at high altitude above an unloaded mapchunk |
| 23:13 |
paramat |
anyway will test that code |
| 23:14 |
paramat |
will do what you suggest too |
| 23:32 |
|
Tmanyo joined #minetest-dev |
