Time  Nick             Message
02:18 CoderForTheBett1 @nerzhul, have a second to answer a question I have about my Lua 'set_rotation()' and 'get_rotation' PR? Should I keep getYaw() instead of replacing with getRotation.Y in areas like https://github.com/minetest/minetest/pull/7395/files#diff-27330fe8b12f281b2b6d288458912306L138
02:20 CoderForTheBett1 I'm thinking of changing it back to make it more clear
02:29 paramat          nerz will be asleep currently (France), he tends to leave his username not marked away overnight
02:30 paramat          maybe i'll consider this myself too
02:31 CoderForTheBett1 Dang, thanks for letting me know. Yeah if you, or anyone else, wants to chime in please do
06:17 nerzhul          oh yeah my IRC custom client doesn't make me afk but it's not a problem heh
08:24 celeron55        >Your project needs to use a standard open source license and must be non-commercial.
08:24 celeron55        >Your project should not have paid support or pay contributors.
08:24 celeron55        this is quite vague
08:25 celeron55        (about the gitlab gold for OSS that nerzhul mentioned)
08:32 nerzhul          we don't pay our contributors and we don't provide paid support, we are eligible
08:32 nerzhul          forks are not eligible
10:53 nerzhul          merging #7411
10:53 ShadowBot        https://github.com/minetest/minetest/issues/7411 -- CSM/SSM: Add on_mods_loaded callback by nerzhul
11:42 Krock            nerzhul, regarding #7410 I'd like to see more dev opinions before we re-structure the entire thing
11:42 ShadowBot        https://github.com/minetest/minetest/issues/7410 -- Modernize lua read (part 2): C++ templating assurance by nerzhul
11:43 Krock            s/structure/design/
12:21 Krock            Merging #7417 in 10 minutes
12:21 ShadowBot        https://github.com/minetest/minetest/issues/7417 -- Stop autoforward on BACKWARD key-press (if autoforward is active) by tukkek
12:31 Krock            Merging..
12:38 nerzhul          Krock as you want, maybe add a point on a meeting
12:38 Krock            indeed, will set up a new discussion soon
12:40 nerzhul          the general idea is to make our Lua API implementation a little bit high level to renforce it and make it more durable and easier to use without performance pernalty
12:41 nerzhul          (it's the global idea, if i'm not there at the meeting like often :) )
12:50 rubenwardy       Callbacks are a bit fucked currently
12:50 rubenwardy       Especially anything to do with node actions
12:59 nerzhul          rubenwardy, if you answer to my message it's not related to callbacks
13:00 rubenwardy       No, you're talking about making the API nicer
13:01 sfan5            >Will there be a 0.4.18 release?
13:01 sfan5            i thought we had that already
13:03 Krock            yes, but to clarify because paramat would like to have one
13:03 Krock            to finally have that discussed
13:04 Krock            or there was already this topic and a final conclusion but I couldn't find any IRC logs whether that happened
13:34 JDCodeIt         I see pipeworks made the leap to GitLab. Is there a plan for MT to migrate?
13:36 Krock            open the issue tracker. first page.
13:48 rubenwardy       That's by Vanessa
13:48 rubenwardy       She's independent
13:49 VanessaE         yeah, not exactly on-topic for here :)
13:49 VanessaE         besides, it's more nore's mod than mine :P
14:54 nerzhul          omg sqlite 3.24 released with upserts, nice :)
14:54 nerzhul          https://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=news_item&px=SQLite-3.24-Released-UPSERT
14:55 nerzhul          for the 0.4.18 it don't think it's needed if we just define a 0.5 release in 1 or 2 months, with 3 weeks of feature freeze
14:56 nerzhul          (as it's a big release 3 weeks should be sufficient and necessary)
14:56 nerzhul          and as i already said, 0.5.0 cannot be a perfect release, like any other software
14:58 rubenwardy       What's your opinion on adding encryption to the protocol?
14:58 rubenwardy       As that's a network breaking change
15:29 Fixer            as usual https://github.com/minetest/minetest/pulls?q=is%3Apr+is%3Aopen+label%3A%22One+approval%22
17:03 nerzhul          rubenwardy, useless as the only sensitive information is the password, which uses SRP
17:05 rubenwardy       Injection of csms though
17:05 nerzhul          you mean injecting rogue mods during loading phasis ?
17:08 nerzhul          the current protocol cannot be easily encrypted
17:08 nerzhul          and also it will slow down reassembly process
17:08 nerzhul          also unreliable packets like movement should not be encrypted because latency is highly important
17:15 rubenwardy       May be worth commenting this in that thread
19:55 Krock            Updated the discussion with the two reported issues of 0.4.17 to probably do a bugfix-bugfix release 8)  https://github.com/orgs/minetest/teams/engine/discussions/11
19:56 Krock            Maybe further issues will be reported in the next few days - hopefully not, but it's hard to see whether all bugfixes were backported actually
19:57 VanessaE         inb4 "crap, that/0.4.14.1 wasn't enough, here comes 0.4.14.2" ;)
19:58 rubenwardy       drop the 0.
19:58 rubenwardy       s/0.5.0/2.0.0/g
19:59 nerzhul          why 2 and not 1 ?
19:59 Krock            s/2.0.0/2.0-dev/
19:59 rubenwardy       if we were using semvar, 1.0.0 would be around 0.4.1
19:59 rubenwardy       and 0.5.0 would be 2.0.0
19:59 rubenwardy       lol
20:00 rubenwardy       mainly because I dislike releasing a 1.0.0 because of the implication
20:00 rubenwardy       the implication
20:00 nerzhul          2.0 means rewrite the 1.0 :p
20:04 rubenwardy       I'm willing to compromise and go for 1.0.0 though
20:04 rubenwardy       although
20:04 rubenwardy       let's not do this discussion again
20:04 nerzhul          i don't care , for me it's 0.5 :p
20:05 Krock            says the one who started it <.<
20:05 nerzhul          at least we should define a 0.5 release & freeze at a point
20:05 nerzhul          .1 and more are allowed :)
20:05 Krock            nerzhul, it's not ready. there are plenty of crashes. with these it's yet not possible to set a date
20:06 nerzhul          freeze, fix the crashes when ready release ?
20:06 Krock            counter question: then why not fix them and merge like any regular PR to include more features?
20:07 nerzhul          do you think the release miss some features ? :p
20:07 nerzhul          i never see a such release on MT since 4 years :)
20:08 Krock            honestly I have no idea which circumstances cause these crashes to happen and that's what worries me what the release actually could delay
20:15 nerzhul          do you get a backtrace somewhere ?
20:16 Krock            #7272
20:16 ShadowBot        https://github.com/minetest/minetest/issues/7272 -- Occasional crash on shutdown / other reported crashes
20:16 Krock            so yes, backtrace is available.
20:26 nerzhul          wow so many crashed on shutdown
20:27 nerzhul          does other coredevs continues to add unittests when regression are fixed or new features ?
20:27 nerzhul          it's one way to prevent those crashed, by ensuring code quality
20:27 Krock            the itemstack meta crash seems familiar to what I observed in older Minetest versions already, so that's most likely not caused by any recent commits