Time Nick Message 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! 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 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 12:30 Krock pushing 12:53 nerzhul thanks sfan5, your comment is just real ! 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 :) 15:30 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' 16:07 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 :) 16:32 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 .. 17:48 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 18:43 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 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 19:16 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 19:27 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 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