Time Nick Message 16:12 Desour is there a dev meeting today? 16:18 rubenwardy Yes 17:03 proller time to discuss https://github.com/minetest/minetest/pull/12142 ! 17:08 Krock .. nothing to discuss= 17:08 Krock that's good 17:30 rubenwardy 30 mins until meeting 17:32 MTDiscord if there isn't anything to discuss, can always review some prs in that allotted time 😄 17:34 Zughy[m] ^ 17:34 Zughy[m] There are no points to discuss 17:34 rubenwardy added some points 17:34 rubenwardy sfan5: did you want to retest #10100 as it's changed since your approval? 17:34 ShadowBot https://github.com/minetest/minetest/issues/10100 -- Additional texture modifiers by Treer 17:37 MTDiscord external point: feel free to disregard... there is a lot of issues but only 5 marked as high priority, is it worth having an elevated priority for things that aren't high priority but do have impact to help improve visibility. it sometimes many things are classified as low priority, but it's hard to see what is a priority (in terms of bugs that probably don't fit into the roadmap) 17:39 MTDiscord Something something sound api PR something 17:39 rubenwardy the sound refactor PR has my approval but I would like sfan to finish his review 17:42 Desour_ sorry that I haven't provided reproducible tests. idk how to make good test scenarios for testing sounds or other client effects 18:00 srifqi hello 18:01 Krock weclome 18:02 Desour_ yes, welcome! 18:03 Krock @ 5.7.1 release seems OK just for Android, although I have no idea how that's done 18:04 srifqi thank you for the welcome 18:07 lhofhansl Hello 18:10 srifqi hello 18:10 pgimeno so, no points left? 18:10 lhofhansl Where is the list of points? 18:10 Desour_ !dev meeting 18:10 ShadowBot Desour_: Error: That URL raised 18:10 Desour_ !meeting 18:10 srifqi about the Android patch release, there are some PRs that I would like to be merged before it 18:11 Desour_ !dev meetings 18:11 ShadowBot Desour_: Error: That URL raised 18:12 rubenwardy https://dev.minetest.net/Meetings 18:12 srifqi !dev Meetings 18:12 ShadowBot Meetings - Minetest Developer Wiki -- http://dev.minetest.net/Meetings 18:12 rubenwardy https://github.com/minetest/minetest/pulls?q=is%3Aopen+is%3Apr+label%3A%22Roadmap%3A+Needs+approval%22 18:12 Desour_ oh, it's cases sensitive x) 18:12 lhofhansl Thanks. 18:14 Krock more fine-grained clouds would look nice 18:15 Krock of course, implemented with perlin noise using multiple octaves for a smooth appearance 18:15 MTDiscord Or perhaps generalizing celestial objects and sky planes into a unified interface that games have full control over 👀 18:16 Krock oh. I was checking the issues, not the PR. sorry, my mad. 18:16 Krock s/mad/bad/ 18:17 lhofhansl Going to merge #12439 and then I'd like to close on #13093 18:17 ShadowBot https://github.com/minetest/minetest/issues/12439 -- Avoid jittering when player is attached by lhofhansl 18:17 ShadowBot https://github.com/minetest/minetest/issues/13093 -- Avoid attachment and other jitter. by lhofhansl 18:18 Desour_ we can probably ignore those that are waiting on dependency for now, right? (#12588, #12589) 18:18 ShadowBot https://github.com/minetest/minetest/issues/12588 -- Add setting to mirror hands by LizzyFleckenstein03 18:18 ShadowBot https://github.com/minetest/minetest/issues/12589 -- Add keybind to swap items between hands by LizzyFleckenstein03 18:21 srifqi oh, i just realised about the label. i've never seen it before 18:21 lhofhansl Why do we need roadmap approval for the .tr translations? 18:21 Krock because it's not clear where to put them best 18:23 Krock unless you've got a RUN_IN_PLACE Minetest build, those files would not be not so easily accessible for mod development 18:24 Krock ideas/solutions are welcome 18:24 Desour_ for translations scripts, see also: https://irc.minetest.net/minetest-dev/2023-04-30 18:25 Desour_ https://irc.minetest.net/minetest-dev/2023-04-30#i_6080414 * 18:25 srifqi #12903 is a UI improvement, isn't it? 18:25 ShadowBot https://github.com/minetest/minetest/issues/12903 -- Set window caption to subgame name by NO411 18:25 srifqi albeit a small one 18:26 Krock inconsistent, though. 18:26 Krock it'll only work in singleplayer 18:27 srifqi does the game name also sent to the clients? or is it just sent to the server list? 18:28 Krock server list only, to my knowledge. 18:28 MTDiscord the game name is also sent to the clients 18:29 MTDiscord under gameid 18:29 MTDiscord mostly either "minetest", "MultiCraft", or "MineClone2" 18:30 srifqi (btw, the column on the server list is still called "subgame" instead of just "game") 18:30 MTDiscord was there some server list viewer update that i havent downloaded yet, because i dont see that column 18:32 Krock it's not shown if your screen is too narrow 18:32 srifqi yes, it won't show on a phone screen 18:32 Krock (speaking of http://servers.minetest.net/ ) 18:33 Krock although that's not what the clients receive upon connect 18:34 MTDiscord http://servers.minetest.net/list is what the clients get 18:35 Krock what about unlisted servers? 18:36 Krock a proper implementation would require to send the game name via client <--> server connection which does yet not happen. and while we're at it: for servers it might make more sense to show the server title instead 18:36 Zughy[m] About translation scripts: they're not good enough imho, and I don't know how much it would help having them in the installation folder 18:36 MTDiscord i agree. showing the game name instead of the server name would be tacky 18:37 Krock Zughy[m]: at least the update script is definitely needed and the other is kinda nice to have as well 18:38 Krock but key is that the installation folder is not always obvious, hence this needs a better alternative 18:38 Zughy[m] As a modder, the output is a mess 18:39 Krock then propose alternatives to make it better 18:40 Krock I found the script from the update_translations repository pretty helpful but haven't looked at Wuzzy's changes 18:43 Zughy[m] I did 18:45 Krock I see 18:45 Krock looks like there's nothing to add 18:47 Krock > #12966 18:47 ShadowBot https://github.com/minetest/minetest/issues/12966 -- make falling node checks check for protection by fluxionary 18:49 Desour_ (made some comments about that on dev wiki) 18:49 Krock I can see the issue but at the same time wouldn't it be the protection mod's responsibility to limit interactions? 18:50 Krock this is similar to using a water or lava bucket above a protected area 18:50 Krock or dropping nodes into it 18:51 MTDiscord i dropped some sand on this guys house once by accident and i couldnt remove it. this would be pretty useful 18:52 Desour_ Krock: the protection mod doesn't stop interaction. it's the responsibility of all the other mods to invoke is_protected 18:52 srifqi if it's protection mod's responsibility, how slow would it be compared to engine checks? 18:52 Desour_ in this case the responsible mod is *builtin* 18:52 Krock yes.. which makes it a design question 18:53 Desour_ I'm currently thinking it would be best to just check protection in the registered on_punch callback 18:54 Krock add a player name to core.check_for_falling and let protection mods overwrite that .. ? 18:55 srifqi ^ +1 18:55 srifqi i was thinking about other ways a node can fall other than on punch 18:55 Krock on_punch works too but requires retrieving the node groups for every punch action which is some overhead 18:56 Krock right. the check function would cover all cases related to spawning __builtin:falling_node 18:57 Desour_ there aren't so many on_punch actions 19:01 MTDiscord if you place the block against another block, it'll fall without a punch 19:01 MTDiscord so you could build above and place 60 falling blocks 19:02 Krock good point 19:03 Desour_ the PR isn't about nodes falling in into protected areas. (which can also happen from the side if you're using tnt, btw) 19:04 Desour_ if you're placing against a protected node, you're at the protection boarder (where you could also do other shenanigans, such as placing a water source) 19:04 Krock that's a different issue, though. 19:04 Krock just because something else works does not mean that it's okay 19:05 Desour_ true 19:07 srifqi how about making it as a stepping stone for other protection-related problem fixes? we just discussed about falling and liquid spreading 19:09 Krock what do you mean by that? 19:11 srifqi we can "fix" (or add as a feature) falling nodes in protected area and then fix other problems related to protection after that 19:11 srifqi falling nodes check* 19:11 Krock right 19:12 srifqi one by one 19:15 srifqi i'm going to bed. see you 19:15 srifqi i still think that #12903 is a UI improvement, though, especially with the suggestion discussed before 19:15 ShadowBot https://github.com/minetest/minetest/issues/12903 -- Set window caption to subgame name by NO411 19:30 Desour_ "add a player name to core.check_for_falling and let protection mods overwrite that .. ?" <- this is what 12966 currently does, just without the letting mods overwrite it part. is there anything else that a mod would want to do than `if player_name and core.is_protected(p, player_name) then return end` 19:31 Krock record it as a protection violation perhaps 19:31 Zughy[m] I'd like to highlight how, due to "roadmap: needs approval" label alongside the current approach, we're actually discussing these PRs more than the others. Which is the opposite goal of having a roadmap 19:32 MTDiscord a pr that has been not touched since novemeber (6 months ago) is getting too much attention? 19:33 MTDiscord a 10 line change 19:33 Zughy[m] Considering that there are PRs older than that and that this meeting is revolving almost solely on PRs not on the roadmap, yes 19:34 MTDiscord has this been discussed every meeting or just this one? 19:38 Desour_ so, let's just discuss if we want to remove the label then, aka if we want to accept some PR that does the implemented thing 19:40 rubenwardy yeah, these discussions should just be concept approvals - shouldn't dive into the details 19:41 Desour_ i.e. for #12903, I don't really care if the window caption is the project or the subgame title. so I won't approve the intended feature (nor disapprove) 19:41 ShadowBot https://github.com/minetest/minetest/issues/12903 -- Set window caption to subgame name by NO411 19:42 Desour_ (one could count it as UI improvement though) 19:42 Desour_ (=> on roadmap?) 19:43 Desour_ or rather: it's an UI improvement if it's an improvement. I'm not sure if it's an improvement though ) 19:45 MTDiscord sry for intrusion into the meeting, but I would like to reminder once again reviewing my #13020 and #12828 19:45 ShadowBot https://github.com/minetest/minetest/issues/13020 -- 3d line rendering. by Andrey2470T 19:45 ShadowBot https://github.com/minetest/minetest/issues/12828 -- Add vector variation for ContentFeatures 'visual_scale' property. by Andrey2470T 20:49 Zughy[m] closing the remaining PRs 21:05 Zughy[m] #13019 was actually supported by TurkeyMcMac. I see that srifqi put a few positive reactions, does anyone want to take care of the PR? 21:05 ShadowBot https://github.com/minetest/minetest/issues/13019 -- Add trailgen mapgen: v6-like with biome API support by Cartmic 21:28 MTDiscord please don't kill that pr 😦 21:32 MTDiscord 2.2 Internal code refactoring To ensure sustainable development, Minetest's code needs to be refactored and improved. This will remove code rot and allow for more efficient development. 21:33 MTDiscord considering v6 doesn't support biomes and is a liability, shouldn't having a biome supporting replacement actually be an improvement or refactoring of a current feature? 21:34 MTDiscord that pr would be a step towards killing v6 21:34 Zughy[m] mm, I'd say it's a feature request 21:34 Zughy[m] I don't think we've goy any dev who's taking care of mapgen in general 21:34 MTDiscord are you saying v6 is good and compatible with the features and architecture? 21:34 Zughy[m] *got 21:35 MTDiscord you've got one volunteering and put in a pr, solving a problem and you're just going to push them away 21:35 MTDiscord I don't think trailgen is fully compatible with old v6 21:36 MTDiscord if it gets merged, would it not help to deprecate v6? as it would solve the problems which supporting biomes 21:36 Zughy[m] AncientMariner: again, I'm not a manager and this is not a company. I can't tell people to cover something they don't want to cover :P 21:37 MTDiscord you're making decisions on behalf of core devs, almost like a general manager. if a core dev doesn't support it, ok, but who decides if it fits into roadmap or not, because that's real subjective 21:39 Zughy[m] I'm following the roadmap and since it looks like a feature to me (but any core dev is free to say I'm wrong), I'm applying the roadmap to it 21:40 MTDiscord so you're judge and jury of what is and isn't on the roadmap? probably want that documented down, but if you are, and that is cool. dont do the whole slopy shoulders "i ain't a manager" when people ask questions on decisions 21:40 Zughy[m] these decisions I take are from a document people have agreed upon, it's not an initiative of mine - that'd be bad 21:41 Zughy[m] "you've got one volunteering and put in a pr" <= that's about the manager part. I can't do that, I don't assign anything to anyone 21:41 Zughy[m] nor I want to do it 21:42 MTDiscord watching this stuff happen is quite sad. "we are volunteers, put in a pr" "no one looked at the pr, close it". as a consumer of this engine and a game dev, i wouldn't why i waste my time coding for it especially when things like godot are killing it 21:43 MTDiscord obviously i'm peasant consumer so feel free to ignore 🙂 21:43 MTDiscord i should know my place 21:43 MTDiscord (my frustration is because i care, and wonder why i care) 21:43 MTDiscord but care without hope leads to dismay 21:44 Zughy[m] Things like Godot give jobs to people, there is people paid for it (I'm pretty sure some of them work full-time), so you can't really compare MT with Godot 21:44 Zughy[m] *there are people 21:44 MTDiscord godot is an open source game engine where people can come along, learn, and make games on it 21:44 MTDiscord it's a substitute to mt as an engine 21:53 MTDiscord ultimately, mt has growing pains, it started as a small org, and has grown to the point where it needs more help, but in order to get help, it needs to support onboarding into the engine. moving from coding to onboarding isn't always fun, ofc, but if mt wants to reach it's potential, it needs to realise that that is the way to progress. of course unless it wants to remain a project of 5/6 core devs working at their own pace, 21:53 MTDiscord which is fine, but eventually, you'll lose some, and unless you replace them , the workload gets bigger, and it gets more painful, until you lose another. sustainability of this project is something you probably want to think about 21:54 MTDiscord if you don't prioritise onboarding, you are choosing either that you will solve all future problems, or you won't and they'll never get solved 21:55 rubenwardy prioritising onboarding doesn't mean that we should accept all new PRs 21:55 MTDiscord i didn't say accept. reviewing and rejecting is also fine 21:55 MTDiscord my issue is ignoring and closing 21:56 MTDiscord but ignoring hurts more than "i cannot support this because of x" 21:56 MTDiscord it says your work is unworthy of my consideration 21:57 MTDiscord and i'm not saying do more work, and sacrifice more. i'm advocating write less code and review a little more with the time saved 21:57 MTDiscord and i get it isn't fun or sexy 21:57 MTDiscord but it is important 21:57 Zughy[m] I can apply the same logic to people filing a PR not in the roadmap, where the roadmap file is linked and they can understand how it works. If they file it anyway, it says "I don't care it's volunteering and I can't bother to open an issue first, so here's my PR" 21:59 MTDiscord not in the roadmap is subjective, the roadmap wording is so vague it can encompass many things 21:59 MTDiscord mapgens once didn't have biomes, and then they did, but the solution wasn't rolled out to all supported mapgens, it became tech debt 21:59 rubenwardy the idea behind discussing roadmap items in meetings is that it brings devs together to do concept approal 21:59 Zughy[m] No it's not, and if you're not sure, just open an issue first to not risk it 21:59 rubenwardy it's hard to prove a negative 22:00 MTDiscord is mapgens that do not support biomes tech debt? 22:01 MTDiscord is that good architecture? 22:01 rubenwardy maybe, doesn't effect the architecture though and I wouldn't say it's on the roadmap 22:01 MTDiscord 2.2 Internal code refactoring To ensure sustainable development, Minetest's code needs to be refactored and improved. This will remove code rot and allow for more efficient development. 22:01 MTDiscord ---- poorly supported mapgens is rot, it's tech debt 22:01 rubenwardy I disagree, trailgen is not covered that 22:02 MTDiscord v6 is rot 22:02 MTDiscord trialgen is way to migrate away, it may not be correct or the best plan 22:02 MTDiscord it's trying to solve the issue of rot 22:03 MTDiscord is v6 good and fit for the future? 22:03 MTDiscord is it sustainable? 22:05 rubenwardy I would like to see trailgen accepted but it's not something I want to review, so hopefully someone else will add it to their list 22:06 MTDiscord it's about to be closed. unless someone reviews it, the contributor will probably get bored and disappear, and it's dead. when this ticket closes, it's dead 22:06 MTDiscord closing it is rejecting it 🙂 22:07 MTDiscord of course if you close it, it magically gets revised, feedback, it gets resolved, and merged, i'll eat humble pie and say how wrong i was 🙂 22:11 MTDiscord What's the alternative to closing it tho? Forcing someone to review it? 22:13 MTDiscord i didn't say force someone. i would ask if someone has the knowledge to review it, and maybe see if they can consider that over something else they're working on (unless the thing was on the roadmap) if that was the case, maybe after they finished that piece of work 22:14 MTDiscord no one enjoys reviewing, we tend to pick it up after finishing a ticket we're working on 22:15 pgimeno I really thought that #8745 would become a reality, back in the day. I wonder if it can be brought back to life instead of this trailgen thing. 22:15 ShadowBot https://github.com/minetest/minetest/issues/8745 -- Add a modernised Mapgen v6? 22:15 MTDiscord but if only 1 person can review that thing, maybe pick up something they'd review and help them out 🙂 22:16 rubenwardy I thought trailgen was v6 + biomes? 22:16 pgimeno v6-like, not v6 22:17 pgimeno the mapgen in 8745 could replace a v6 with continuity 22:18 pgimeno by "with continuity" I mean that if you had a partially generated world, it would not create a frankenworld (other than because of the change of biomes) 22:19 pgimeno ISTR paramat posting comparison pictures which looked exactly the same except for the look of the terrain 22:20 MTDiscord the complexity with something old, vs replace technically, deprecate and that becomes the recommended option skews heavily in favour of the latter imho 22:21 MTDiscord on mcl2, we deprecated v6 already, it was a liability, and our mobs are biome dependent 22:21 MTDiscord it's just a shame we couldn't use it and something we could use may not happen 22:24 MTDiscord I have a strong deja vu feeling from this conversation 22:25 MTDiscord Don't get me wrong, I agree that the current situation is bad and minetest is losing a lot of good contributors. 22:25 MTDiscord But I honestly don't see any alternative 22:26 MTDiscord Either you lose contributors or you lose coredevs 22:26 MTDiscord i completely get the point of roadmaps and prioritising. it was probably the right call, but to go from 0% roadmap, to 100% roadmap, there is a whole range of percentages 22:27 MTDiscord you're going to lose coredevs anyway, they're human, and eventually life moves on 22:27 MTDiscord if you don't replace them, that's not good 22:27 MTDiscord and puts more burden on those remaining 22:28 MTDiscord 70% roadmap, 30% review. 85% roadmap, 15% review. there are choices 22:28 MTDiscord in my experience,the time i invest in new contributors pays itself off in future features 22:28 MTDiscord i get more out of those people than i put in 22:29 MTDiscord but it's important to see it not as work but another person saying "i want to help, can i?" 22:29 MTDiscord and the following action is either yes, or no 22:30 MTDiscord and that message is heard by that person and anyone watching or that cared about that feature 22:30 MTDiscord new contributors are plants that need to be watered, but when that plant grows, it feeds you and others 22:31 MTDiscord people learn, improve and get better 22:31 MTDiscord they don't often start shit and stay shit 22:31 Zughy[m] mentoring takes time as well, so I guess that's why we're looking only for people who proved to really care about the project 22:32 MTDiscord so an abusive relationship? knock 'em about a bit, and if they keep coming back for more they're a winner? 22:32 MTDiscord helping people is.... err satisfying and rewording 22:33 MTDiscord it isn't neccessarily a chore 22:33 Zughy[m] And who helps us exactly? I'm part of two different volunteer realities and a lot of people just disappear after the first two weeks 22:33 Zughy[m] that's why you really want to filter them out 22:34 MTDiscord why do you think they dissappear? 🙂 22:34 MTDiscord maybe it's the people and not the process that's wrong lol 22:35 Zughy[m] Because some people say "yes" too quickly without understanding what being an active part of the organisation means 22:35 MTDiscord i was told months ago i was a flakey contributor, and i'd just leave, i became maintainer for 6 months plus... 22:35 Zughy[m] You are not everyone 22:36 MTDiscord you're trying to fit people into a structure rather than build a structure around people 22:37 MTDiscord people want to give up their time and help, and it's worth telling them how 22:37 MTDiscord rather than ignoring them 22:37 MTDiscord Ahah, contributing to minetest is an abusive relationship indeed. 22:37 Zughy[m] I mean, I'm literally bringing Minetest in 4 different conferences at my expenses, I think I'm doing my part 22:37 rubenwardy I already review a lot more PRs than I make. The roadmap is a way of communicating the things that we want to work on next. But things can still be concept approved aside that. There's no point accepting things we don't want just in hopes of getting more people, that's self-sabotage 22:37 MTDiscord I don't think it can be fixed, but I wish you good luck 22:38 MTDiscord i didn't say you wasn't helping, you're clearly passionate and trying to help. doesn't mean you're also correct as well... 22:39 MTDiscord i'm an optimist. i think it can be fixed, and it's why i'm having this conversation 22:39 Zughy[m] Let's cut the chase: what's your proposal? 22:39 MTDiscord and i know i'm an annoying outsider "who the fk doesn't he think he is" 22:40 MTDiscord add contributor onboarding as a priority, it doesn't mean the roadmap isn't important, it means this is also important 22:40 Zughy[m] Ok, next: how would you do it? 22:40 MTDiscord don't see prs and contributions as work, see it as people wanting to help 22:40 MTDiscord code less, and review more 🙂 22:41 Zughy[m] not feasible. Quoting rubenwardy: "I already review a lot more PRs than I make" 22:41 MTDiscord be honest with people when it's not good rather than ignore them 22:41 MTDiscord ruben is a champ 22:41 MTDiscord i'm not saying him 22:41 MTDiscord i'm assuming he's not the only core dev 22:42 MTDiscord he's been open about struggling with burnout, so yeah, i wouldn't even advocate it's on him 22:42 MTDiscord if ruben's on fire, is someone gonna help put him out 🙂 22:43 Zughy[m] sfan5 currently has 1 PR open, SmallJoker has 2, lhofhansl has 6 and x2048 has 5 22:43 Zughy[m] 14 PRs out of 79 open 22:43 MTDiscord yes, and? 22:43 MTDiscord my impression is core devs prs get reviewed, and no one elses 🙂 22:44 MTDiscord "you're worth my time, screw these scrubs" 22:44 MTDiscord if a pr is open 6 months, and no one has reviewed it, do you not feel embarrassed, yet you'll review a core devs that has been open days 22:45 Zughy[m] of the latest 12 commits, 3 are from core devs and 9 are not. So that's not true 22:45 MTDiscord i've seen prs that have been waiting a response for months, even when a core dev kind of agreed in principle 22:46 MTDiscord your statistic doesn't prove what you think it does 22:46 Zughy[m] (I forgot Desour, who's got 11 PRs open, most of them from the time they weren't core dev) 22:47 Zughy[m] also, you're complaining about not having enough core devs, but we've just celebrated srifqi as a new core dev 22:47 MTDiscord last page of merges, 6 are from insiders (including roller), 3 outsiders 22:48 MTDiscord desour needs some love, and that sound pr is important, but it's a complex and big change 22:48 MTDiscord complex pr's take time 22:48 MTDiscord it's good srifqi has been brought into the fold 22:49 Zughy[m] that's my point of view: if you want outsiders, go look for them. Conferences and call to actions are your best shot. We could use Mastodon and the blog to find more people 22:49 MTDiscord you have outsiders, but they're being ignored. why look for more folk to ignore? 🙂 22:49 Zughy[m] but at the same time the roadmap must be enforced if you don't want core devs drowning 22:49 Zughy[m] and if they drown, that's when denial kicks in 22:49 MTDiscord the roadmap must not be enforced, you sound like a cult 22:50 MTDiscord "the greater good" "the roadmap" 22:50 rubenwardy I see the roadmap more as an optimisation for concept approvals and communicating our priorities 22:50 MTDiscord i don't want them drowning, i think they do too much 🙂 22:50 MTDiscord coding that is 22:51 Zughy[m] The roadmap is something people can take part in, don't use the cult card thanks 22:52 MTDiscord but do you hear yourself, everything is "the roadmap", it became some deity 22:52 MTDiscord if i cannot back up my point. "the roadmap" 22:53 MTDiscord i'm seeing a lot of hiding behind it 22:53 Zughy[m] yeah, it's been ignored for months and, whilst I talk with you, I also have to answser to people who they're now pissed because it took months to close their ignored PRs instead of being closed after those famous 7 days 22:54 Zughy[m] in short, I'm here to take all the shit 22:55 srifqi hello. sorry for interrupting. can i start do core dev-spesific task or is there any onboarding process? 22:55 MTDiscord you think i'm being adversarial. i'm some shit to deal with. why do you think i'm motivated to talk to you? because i see a problem, and i'm trying to highlight it. i could be nice, and agreeable, but will that help long term? probably not 22:56 Zughy[m] srifqi: please do 22:56 srifqi will do on the afternoon. thank you 22:56 Zughy[m] <3 22:56 MTDiscord i will leave you to it zughy, i'm obviously wasting your time. you've got it all figured out 22:56 MTDiscord good luck 22:58 Zughy[m] AncientMariner: I've never called you a shit, I wouldn't ever dare. You're frustrated, I get it, but you're portraying me as some cult guy for once that I apply something that's been written in two different places for months. I don't think it's fair 22:58 MTDiscord no, i didn't, i was responding to "we must enforce the roadmap" comment, it was ridiculously cult like 22:59 MTDiscord if you've seen hot fuzz "the greater good", and swap it for "the roadmap", you'll get how it comes across 23:04 MTDiscord we can both see the problem. you have a different view to how to solve it, i've put mine across and why. you can disregard but there is value in considering alternative perspectives 23:04 MTDiscord up to you 23:05 MTDiscord and please understand, i'm not challenging you, and core devs, i'm challenging the process and how it's used 23:06 Zughy[m] Well, roadmap or not, the current situation is that there are PRs who've been waiting for years, and it doesn't take a PhD in psychology to understand how they might feel. As an individual, I want to avoid that, because I've been there multiple times. This is not a company and we can't force people to do anything if they don't feel like doing it - also consider that some of us are fine with the current situation. We have a new core dev 23:06 Zughy[m] now, so let's see how it goes, shall we? 23:06 MTDiscord a process is to solve a problem, and if it solves 1 problem, it can create another. for a process to be effective, it should solve problems without creating more 23:06 MTDiscord i can, and it fills me with dread, but it seems you're quite set on learning this one yourself 🙂 23:07 MTDiscord good luck 23:08 MTDiscord "This is not a company and we can't force people to do anything if they don't feel like doing it" and "contributors must work to the roadmap" feels contradictory btw 23:09 Zughy[m] Dude, if you can't see past "roadmap" in my messages, I don't know what to tell you :\ 23:11 MTDiscord ? 23:11 MTDiscord i responded to your comment 23:11 MTDiscord but ok 23:11 MTDiscord i'm going to leave this 23:11 MTDiscord it's going nowhere 23:11 MTDiscord good evening 23:17 MTDiscord btw, the cult comment was a joke based on this scene, probably didn't translate too well if you haven't seen it: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5u8vd_YNbTw 23:25 Zughy[m] srifqi: now that you're core dev, remember you can self-approve your own PRs (such as #13526) 23:25 ShadowBot https://github.com/minetest/minetest/issues/13526 -- Option to invert direction or disable mouse wheel for hotbar item selection by srifqi