Time Nick Message 10:35 TenPlus1 Hi folks o/ does anyone know what's up with ContentDB, am getting "Internal Error" when adding a release ?!? 10:37 sfan5 ping rubenwardy 10:37 TenPlus1 hey sfan5 10:38 rubenwardy Release link? 10:39 rubenwardy If you delete a broken release I can't inspect it 10:39 TenPlus1 clicking + button to make new release, adding info, click save and task failed "unknown server error" 10:39 TenPlus1 just made one 10:40 rubenwardy Hahaha 10:40 TenPlus1 ? o.O 10:40 rubenwardy When reading min_version_version=5.1, ContentDB is matching both 5.1 and 5.10 10:41 rubenwardy I'll need to fix this, it's a CDB bug and not due to your mod 10:42 TenPlus1 Ouch! hope it's an easy fix 10:59 TenPlus1 will check back in laters o/ 11:15 MTDiscord Regarding #14964: is it acceptable to limit the use of scancode to the SDL device and continue to use keycodes for non-SDL devices? 11:15 ShadowBot https://github.com/minetest/minetest/issues/14964 -- Use scancodes for keybindings by y5nw 12:14 proller type rename again ready to merge to 5.9.0 + https://github.com/minetest/minetest/compare/master...proller:minetest:minetest32double?expand=1 nothing broken, just types 12:16 [MTMatrix]_ y5nw: other Irrlicht devices don't support scancodes and we don't want to invest more work into them, so that's the only sensible option 15:56 sfan5 if you have a game nested in a modpack server startup will fail without an error message 15:57 sfan5 great waste of time until I found this out 16:01 sfan5 at least in docker, it doesn't reproduce outside of it 16:01 sfan5 ?! 17:33 Krock sfan5: to approve one or not, that is the question. 17:33 Krock :3 19:51 sfan5 merging #14945, #14974, #13987, #14883 in like 5m 19:51 ShadowBot https://github.com/minetest/minetest/issues/14945 -- DOCS: state that `initial_properties` are shared between entity instances by Zughy 19:51 ShadowBot https://github.com/minetest/minetest/issues/14974 -- Fix chance/probability wording in lua_doc.md by kno10 19:51 ShadowBot https://github.com/minetest/minetest/issues/13987 -- [pls do not squash :3] Allow limiting object observers by appgurueu 19:51 ShadowBot https://github.com/minetest/minetest/issues/14883 -- Fix comment and alpha test node oopsies from #14852 by Desour 20:11 MTDiscord sfan5: squashed what i wanted to squash in #13987 20:11 ShadowBot https://github.com/minetest/minetest/issues/13987 -- [pls do not squash :3] Allow limiting object observers by appgurueu 20:13 sfan5 merged 20:26 sfan5 if modders are lurking here I'd love to know if #14954 is considered useful 20:26 ShadowBot https://github.com/minetest/minetest/issues/14954 -- [manual merge] Bulk LBMs by sfan5 20:29 MTDiscord In abstract, yes, definitely 20:30 MTDiscord I might have specific questions though, like whether I can rely on the positions all being within a single mapblock per call, or whether you'll batch calls acrossm multiple mapblocks. 20:31 MTDiscord I'd actually kind of like to have Active Node Modifiers and Loading Node Modifiers that fire once per mapblock and don't have a node list (they run on any mapblock in the correct state). Of course we'll call then whatever Node Modifiers since they operate on blocks, to be consistent with whatever Block Modifiers that operate on nodes. 20:38 sfan5 (it's all in a single mapblock) 20:48 MTDiscord Tbh I see it being quite useful. 20:49 MTDiscord same, yes. 20:49 MTDiscord BTW, why did you tag it as [manual merge]? 21:02 sfan5 so it could be squashed nicer 21:04 MTDiscord I just wish I could have one call per mapblock loaded or active ... and I don't necessarily want to need to guess which kinds of nodes will exist within that mapblock. 21:05 [MTMatrix]_ sfan5: when core devs approve feature requests the label is "concept approved"; since #14990 closes an issue previously approved, the label is the same and I don't have to assign it to you. On the contrary, if there is no concept approved issue, then it's "Supported by core dev" and the dev wins a self-assignment 21:05 ShadowBot https://github.com/minetest/minetest/issues/14990 -- Reject most commands if sent via an unreliable packet by red-001 21:05 MTDiscord There may exist mapblocks containing nothing but air, nothing but water, or nothing but stone, so there's no single node name I can supply for nodenames that will ensure I get to see each mapblock that gets loaded. I could give every definition a "group:all" or something, I guess, but it still feels wrong that C++ will spend time building a list of every node position in the mapblock when I only need that in some cases. 21:13 Mantar I think "all" should be a standard engine name for "give me everything" 21:25 MTDiscord yeah, the idea of making group:all a standard thing is kind of nice 21:26 MTDiscord though, if I want to be notified about every node, I don't really need to be told about each one, it's enough to tell me about the mapblock and I can infer all the node positions that apply from that. 21:35 sfan5 " I just wish I could have one call per mapblock loaded or active " I proposed generic state change callbacks for mapblocks in some lbm-related issue 21:35 sfan5 please absolutely don't invent a group:all and use it, most code written to deal with single nodes is not written to deal with everything at once 21:36 sfan5 here it was -> https://github.com/minetest/minetest/issues/14723#issuecomment-2148224322 21:41 MTDiscord loaded_blocks and active_blocks would totally work for me 21:41 MTDiscord sounds simple 21:42 MTDiscord I really don't mind polling those and generating my own events if I want something event driven. In many cases though I actually won't want that, I'll want the lists. 21:45 Mantar I was specifically thinking of minetest.get_nodes_in_area(), which would be nice to get all nodes in an area, but it's currently not possible 22:03 sfan5 uhhh, sounds like you want vmanips 22:03 sfan5 "please give me all node tables" isn't something you want to do for 9000 nodes 22:06 Mantar who said 9000 nodes? I'm thinking a block of 27 or so 22:09 sfan5 we had a PR for bulk_get_node, it was rejected because it's not any faster than calling get_node repeatedly 22:10 Mantar faster would be nice, but I was mainly thinking of convenience ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ 22:10 MTDiscord Shout-out to red-001. No idea who you/they are, but thanks for the review on the spatial map merge. Lots of good things there 22:33 MTDiscord Old minetest community member iirc 23:02 MTDiscord Interesting, why review mine haha, but hey I'll take it