Time Nick Message 09:46 ROllerozxa is there any particular reason luajit is statically linked for the windows builds? I believe this makes it impossible to require() a native library (e.g. luasocket, as I am trying to get working right now) as it needs to link against a lua51.dll, that does not exist because it's inside of the executable 09:47 ROllerozxa (asking sfan5 I suppose since minetest's luajit for windows is built from here: https://github.com/sfan5/mingw-pkgs/blob/master/luajit) 11:01 sfan5 it always was that way 11:07 ROllerozxa I know 15:20 sfan5 whats the status on 5.9.1? 15:24 SFENCE Delayed to next meeting now. 15:40 sfan5 ROllerozxa: this is the reason https://x0.at/Rj_O.txt 15:41 sfan5 I even checked what msys2 does since they also have clang and they just build statically :trollface: https://github.com/msys2/MINGW-packages/blob/master/mingw-w64-luajit/PKGBUILD#L66 15:49 [MatrxMT] sfan5: the sooner it gets released the better. It's been almost a month we've been out with a half broken release 15:51 sfan5 looks like we're basically waiting for two PRs, one of which is mine 15:54 MTDiscord #15122 Trivial one... for 5.9.1 release... so we can say, that MacOS 12 and newer are supported at least. 15:54 ShadowBot https://github.com/minetest/minetest/issues/15122 -- Generate Minetest.app on MacOS 12, so at least MacOS 12 will be supported. by sfence 17:54 MTDiscord What's the lowest MacOS version MTE could run on in terms of APIs used etc. and not in terms of "what build pipeline allows"? 17:57 SFENCE I was able to compile it with MacOSX10.15 SDK. But I don't have feedback if it runnable yet. 18:00 SFENCE With MacOSX10.14 SDK some requied curl functions was missing. 18:02 SFENCE Herowl: I believe it will be possible to support macOS 10.15 only with updating build process. 18:53 SFENCE Herowl: By experiences from #15065, there was a problem with linking... aplication was linkded with symbols avaliable only in newer version of macOS. 18:53 ShadowBot https://github.com/minetest/minetest/issues/15065 -- minetest 5.9.0 release build cannot be run on macOS 10.15 Catalina since it was compiled for macOS 13 19:11 [MatrxMT] another 5.9 regression: #15105 19:11 ShadowBot https://github.com/minetest/minetest/issues/15105 -- Upright sprite animation is broken on MT5.9.0 19:25 Krock not if you use my PC 19:25 sfan5 tbh I ignored that issue becaue half of the fields were "No response" 19:43 Mantar oh, my bad 19:44 Mantar I'll fix that in a bit 19:56 MTDiscord Mantar: not needed, i already have a fix 20:01 MTDiscord do we maybe want more priority labels 20:02 MTDiscord currently we have low priority, untagged (which could mean either medium priority or undecided priority), and high priority, which i feel isn't granular enough 20:03 MTDiscord for example i'd now like to tag #9357 as "higher priority (imo) than your average untagged issue, but probably not quite high priority" 20:03 ShadowBot https://github.com/minetest/minetest/issues/9357 -- Mapgen: "Unfinished" y-slices with num_emerge_threads > 1 20:04 MTDiscord Tbh an "elevated" priority could be a good idea 20:05 MTDiscord We have p1-p4 and p6 labels (untagged is p5) in VL 20:05 MTDiscord P1 is "critical", for crashes and other serious stuff, like possible data lose. 20:05 MTDiscord P2 is high 20:05 MTDiscord P3 is elevated 20:06 MTDiscord P4 is medium (theoretically more important than untagged, unworthy of elevation but standing out somehow) 20:06 MTDiscord P6 is low 20:07 MTDiscord It's not like it's enforced thoroughly though, we're severely undermanned for that and many issues are ancient 20:08 sfan5 priority is kind of a meme anyway since 80% of what people work work on is their own interests 20:09 MTDiscord currently i'm not looking for a way to forcefully slap a priority label on anything, i'm just hoping to have some labels that can be used to attract attention. 20:10 Desour if you want to draw attention, a good way is to mention the issue here on irc 20:10 Desour as could be seen just before 20:11 MTDiscord well, i did that too, en passant as part of the priority discussion ;) 20:11 MTDiscord We're applying priorities both to issues and PRs. When reviewing PRs, I tend to look at higher priorities, for example, to review first (skipping sometimes for whatever reason, but at least considering those) 20:12 MTDiscord (in VL) 20:12 Desour sorry, I'm not good at speech figures. what does the en passant chess move have to do with this @luatic? x) 20:13 MTDiscord Desour: obviously, while i was chatting, i was enjoying a game of chess, and in that game, i happened to make an en passant move x) 20:13 MTDiscord Anyway, it's obviously not so simple with issues, because high priority that linger around tend to be the non-trivial harder tougher unclear ones, and the priority itself doesn't move them closer to fixing anyway 21:30 [MatrxMT] I'm against the multiple priority labels. Having something labelled anyway is already a nice incentive to ignore it. And I agree with sfan5, people pick whatever they want anyway. I think that the current "High priority" label is enough (+ "good first issue" for new entries) 21:30 [MatrxMT] *labelled "low priority" anyway 21:32 [MatrxMT] rather, if we want to find more contributors, we should consider platforms like https://www.codetriage.com/ 23:04 LandarVargan cmd mode 23:04 LandarVargan heh, forgot I joined this channel