Time Nick Message 10:14 erlehmann rubenwardy sfan5 i am very happy about the CVEs and debian patching old minetest to not be vulnerable. i guess this is the way to go to ensure there are old versions of minetest get security and stability fixes – let someone else to do, by scaring them with the info of what happens if they do not. 10:14 erlehmann strike the “to” 10:15 erlehmann also it might scare users into upgrading to newer minetest 10:15 erlehmann which is great imo 10:16 erlehmann i think other crash fixes should be communicated like this too, if the patches are largely compatible. 11:53 rubenwardy one thing that annoys me is how twitter bots keep spamming the CVE links 11:53 rubenwardy it makes reading a minetest search painful 12:57 celeron55 does "all pubilicity is good publicity" apply? seems like an easy way to get some 13:50 erlehmann well, twitter is the platform that did not delete donald trump. 13:50 erlehmann also, i saw some cryptocurrency scammers trying to associate with minetest there already 13:55 rubenwardy ...twitter did? 13:56 erlehmann for a long time, they did not 13:58 erlehmann twitter is built on controversy, on engagement 13:58 erlehmann not on disseminating useful information, that's a side effect rather 14:00 erlehmann regardless … i'll try to figure out which other things are ready for a security notice. i.e. what crashes have been patched where backporting is one or two cherry-picks. 14:03 erlehmann remotely-triggerable crashes obviously 14:53 Pexin was LocalPlayer::old_move() supposed to be removed at some point, anyone know off the top of your head? 14:56 erlehmann Pexin what is it 14:57 erlehmann i mean what you are asking is probably if “physics_override_new_move” is supposed to be removed 14:57 erlehmann right? 14:58 Pexin well it's an entire alternate player movement function. 14:59 erlehmann does it hinder any future efforts? 15:00 erlehmann (doesn't look like that to me) 15:00 Pexin it's redundant code to maintain 15:00 erlehmann i think a lot of the people who *love* to delete code misunderstand what “maintaining” entails 15:01 erlehmann if the code is *finished*, the maintenance burden is much less than if it interacts with a lot of stuff 15:01 erlehmann i do not know the state of this function, but “it's redundant” is probably not true (otherwise it would not be there) 15:01 erlehmann and “to maintain” depends entirely on what other stuff it touches 15:02 erlehmann or if it represents problems to come 15:03 erlehmann Pexin i guess two good questions are “how is minetest held back by the existence of this function” and “can this function stay as it is, or does it need any fixing” and “if i want to add something to movement code, do i have to add it to two functions?” 15:03 erlehmann three 15:04 erlehmann three good questions 15:04 erlehmann i can't answer those 15:07 erlehmann https://github.com/minetest/minetest/issues/7107 15:07 erlehmann > New movement code was added to fix damage-avoiding bugs, but this changed sneak behaviour, so we then added non-identical simulations of sneak jump and sneak ladder to it, and later added an option for using the old movement code. The old movement code was initially meant to be temporary but now due to huge player and server demand it is now going to be kept. 15:09 MTDiscord The fact that this discussion exists at all is indicative of the ongoing cognitive burden of maintenance imposed by that functionality. 15:10 erlehmann a simple comment in the code could have prevented it 15:10 rubenwardy Pexin: old move will be kept for the foreseeable future 15:10 Pexin ok 15:11 rubenwardy It doesn't need to support new futures though. And in fact shouldn't 15:11 erlehmann features 15:11 rubenwardy yeah 15:11 erlehmann but yeah, it's old, it does not need to support futures 15:11 erlehmann heheheehe 18:32 erlehmann wuzzy sent me this when i asked how to make leveled nodetypes cauldrons (because someone used like 8 nodes for a composter with differend nodeboxes) https://github.com/minetest/minetest/pull/11391 18:33 erlehmann i want to once again ask for reviewer status 18:37 MTDiscord oh yeah, plus one for that pr, objection to erehmann being a reviewer/core dev however 18:42 erlehmann i guess your opinion counts as much as mine. 18:43 erlehmann (not at all) 22:15 sfan5 merging #12074 22:15 ShadowBot https://github.com/minetest/minetest/issues/12074 -- Clean up ClientReady packet handling by sfan5 22:15 sfan5 soon 23:14 Pexin I have a question for coredevs #11939 please comment whenever convenient 23:14 ShadowBot https://github.com/minetest/minetest/issues/11939 -- Restore and enhance bouncy behavior by pecksin