Time  Nick       Message
04:44 jas_       #4256
04:44 ShadowBot  https://github.com/minetest/minetest/issues/4256 -- Fade and sound playback with gain <= 0 delete the handle (for mute)
04:44 jas_       i will continue testing as im not 100 percent sure
04:45 jas_       but still, minetest.fade isnt suitable for (un)muting
17:28 paramat    some android PRs are coming in attending to the blockers, please review
17:34 * VanessaE growls at paramat
17:39 paramat    can anyone help with this " I would like to verify that NDEBUG is in fact present for release builds. It should be, otherwise something else is wrong but this still needs to be verified." https://github.com/minetest/minetest/issues/7525#issuecomment-435605854
17:40 p_gimeno   hmm... add "assert(false);" at the top of main() and see?
17:41 p_gimeno   or even #ifndef NDEBUG \n # error NDEBUG not set \n #endif
17:42 sfan5      #error something  is definitely the easiest way
17:45 rubenwardy That's not a fix, that's hiding the problem
17:45 rubenwardy Please only merge that into backport
17:45 paramat    i know :) but no-one is coding the fix
17:45 paramat    and it can be done later
17:47 rubenwardy It won't be done later
17:48 rubenwardy Well fine, add it to the list of graphics issues
17:51 paramat    hm, it's certainly better to fix it properly, i'm just concerned that won't get done. that issue has gone nowhere for months. well, at least the fix can be backported if done
18:32 Krock      !tell paramat Where's the second disapproval? https://github.com/minetest/minetest/pull/7833#issuecomment-435609366
18:32 ShadowBot  Krock: O.K.
18:33 Krock      !tell paramat If you think that were me - the code only needs a few changes, it's not a PR disapprobal
18:33 ShadowBot  Krock: O.K.
18:38 VanessaE   whoa whoa whoa
18:38 VanessaE   I'm sorry, now I gotta say something
18:39 VanessaE   paramat:  that last reply was just plain unacceptable
18:41 sfan5      "Neglect closure" a day after the PR was proposed
18:41 sfan5      wew
18:44 Krock      wew indeed. wrote a statement
18:47 p_gimeno   looks like paramat is pissed of based on his previous experience with this guy, kind of understandable but maybe he should just recuse himself from participating in these
18:47 VanessaE   tenplus1 has been a decent, well-meaning contrib to this project for a while now.
18:48 VanessaE   to chase him off just....  I have no words.
21:36 crazyR     I dont know more than what ive read in that PR... but from reading that PR... seems personal opinion of the author has impaired paramats judgment in that particular PR. Regardless of history between 2 people. as a reviewer paramat should be impartial when reviewing.. *just my 2 cents
21:36 crazyR     *each pr should be judged on its own merit i think i ment to say
21:41 paramat    nope, my review of that PR and my requests would have been identical whoever wrote it and however they behaved. the other stuff about behaviour is independent
21:43 paramat    putting irritation aside, here are the remaining issues https://github.com/minetest/minetest/pull/7833#issuecomment-435616837
21:44 paramat    those 5 issues are valid
21:45 VanessaE   paramat: I'm sorry, but just no.  I think you crossed the line.   or to put it another way... had you made those comments to me, I'd have walked away too, and you know how persistent I can be.
21:49 paramat    you haven't been reviewing his PRs over the last few years though,
21:49 VanessaE   no, I have not.  but I have seen the results of his efforts.
21:57 paramat    so you don't know that i am actually stating the truth about his behaviour :)
21:57 VanessaE   ...
21:58 sfan5      "my review of that PR and my requests would have been identical whoever wrote it" / "you haven't been reviewing his PRs over the last few years though"
21:58 VanessaE   stating the truth, you may be, but you still went way too far.,
21:58 sfan5      isn't that a direction contraction
21:58 sfan5      contradiction*
22:07 paramat    i see no contradiction, but nevermind :) vanessa i was quite restrained actually, no personal insults, fairly civil
22:07 * VanessaE shrugs
22:09 paramat    anyway, closing it was wrong, i was irritated. this is what years of uncooperative behaviour and trying to tolerate it does
22:10 paramat    not just me, so-far was also irritated by his contribution behaviour a few years back
22:13 VanessaE   you're missing a crucial point:  it isn't just one message I'm talking about, it's the whole barrage.  6 in a row, AFTER he walked away and closed?
22:19 paramat    read the comments after his close. the first deals with my irritation, the rest are not rants and are technical points
22:19 VanessaE   I did.
22:19 VanessaE   you repeated yourseld.
22:19 VanessaE   f*
22:20 paramat    in the first comment only, not 6
22:20 VanessaE   yse yse, but you simply did NOT need to reply at all.
22:20 VanessaE   yes**
22:20 paramat    it's unhealthy to bottle in deep irritation, that's what caused this in the first place :)
22:23 sofar      I may have been irritated in the past with tenplus1, but honestly at this point I'd try and focus on cooperation as much as possible
22:23 sofar      identify acceptable and wanted elements in a PR, work on a solution together etc.
22:23 paramat    yeah
22:23 sofar      ( I didnt read the thread )
22:23 VanessaE   you want to vent irritation, go find a punching bag.
22:23 paramat    see my later comments
22:25 paramat    nah, if someone is extremely difficult, they need to be told, as long as it's reasonably civil
22:25 sofar      my preference is always to leave PRs open until the desired outcome is reached
22:26 sofar      closed PRs means submitters are no longer attached and will just vaporize
22:26 paramat    yes, my mistake
22:26 sofar      I've made so many mistakes myself :)
22:27 sofar      I just replied to a forum thread earlier today, for instance!
22:27 sofar      XD
22:47 sofar      can I be honest? that PR is a disaster to begin with
22:48 sofar      I'm reading the code and 50 lines changed while 3 lines of functionality are the actual core of the change
22:48 sofar      and half of that isn't even properly mentioned in the summary
22:49 sofar      PR's that start with "rewrite X" and "to fix Y" are pure garbage to begin with
22:49 sofar      if Y needs fixing, submit a fix to Y, and don't pull in 30+ lines of rewrite with it
22:49 sofar      [/rant]
22:50 sofar      "honey I fixed the plumbing!" -> house burnt down
22:54 paramat    yeah, the bugfix needs to be separate, as i requested :)
22:56 paramat    also the bug isn't explained and there isn't a link to an issue, so we don't really know what is being fixed and what changes attend to the bug
22:57 paramat    but i'm going to try to extract any useful bugfix (if there is one) out of this
23:02 paramat    i think he redoes code for his own use, then gets butthurt when we point out the mistakes and how it's wrong for MT, so then ignores some issues, won't answer questions, the usual behaviour as before :)
23:16 paramat    the really irritating behaviour is the 'going silent' on an issue or a question, would much prefer he refuses, or argues :)
23:23 crazyR     unless there is some other convo that i've not been privy too... i dont see how he got but hurt... no bodt is telling  you that your "opinion/points" are wrong regarding the PR.... simply the way you handled it.   I think... thats my impression anyhow
23:25 crazyR     any how, its late im going spending some time with the missus, i hope you guys can resolve your diffrences.... it never ends well when contributers and devs fall out
23:37 paramat    well ... you wrote above: "I dont know more than what ive read in that PR.", and i'm referring to the history of his behaviour in my 'butthurt' comment. tenplus can resolve this by being more cooperative, i would welcome that
23:41 paramat    your judgement is actually very limited if you know very little about the topic. if you knew more you might somewhat sympathise with me and understand how irritating it is :)