Time Nick Message 00:01 MTDiscord If we use an external server, don't we avoid the GH part of it and just get the benefits of git tracking? I thought that was the earlier linked convo 00:01 MTDiscord I've asked about this multiple times, am I wrong in my understanding? 00:04 MTDiscord There is no benefit here 00:04 MTDiscord Again, I don't want to slow us down if we need something quick in the short term. And maybe we just need a few videos uploaded by trusted contributors. But if we ever want to allow other folks to upload videos, we should use a user-friendly solution. Maybe we're not at that bridge yet, maybe we don't even want to go in that direction. Just want to make sure we're thinking this through 00:04 MTDiscord Ay caramba, no benefit to listing files and adding new ones? Git allows contributions, a webserver hosted by someone does not, that's the benefit 00:05 MTDiscord I feel like I've been talked over a lot here. Maybe I'll make a proper issue later for focused discussion. Gonna walk the dog now 00:06 MTDiscord the file listing part is (1) not really needed (2) a more or less trivial grep. git lfs would only add a relatively unnecessary layer of indirection here. i am assuming that there will be an easier way to upload files than "ask wsor". 00:06 MTDiscord And again it doesn't matter because the output is limited to 1gb 00:06 MTDiscord Again why does GH Pages matter for Git LFS? 00:06 MTDiscord tbh realistically i don't think we'll be crossing 1 gb soon 00:07 MTDiscord Re last bit, yes. That would just be at the start 00:07 MTDiscord My concern, in a sentence: When someone says "hey, I want to add this video to the docs site" what will we say? 00:07 MTDiscord Videos will easily eat 1GB of bandwidth in a month 00:07 MTDiscord the 1 GB is bandwidth? 00:07 MTDiscord Because 1gb of crap in git lfs will be in the output 00:07 MTDiscord Its both 00:07 MTDiscord Did anyone read the article? 00:08 MTDiscord Yes 00:08 MTDiscord some variation of "here's the page where you can upload files" i imagine? 00:08 MTDiscord Well you linked it :p 00:08 MTDiscord i didn't 00:08 MTDiscord All concerns are moot in the face of the bandwidth/storage limit 00:09 MTDiscord Unless Mark wants to foot the bill 00:09 MTDiscord well Mark seems to have suggested hosting a LFS server..? 00:10 MTDiscord Which is irrelevant https://discord.com/channels/369122544273588224/926231483155378176/1338300327933509712 00:10 MTDiscord Can third party servers be hosted as lfs? (I may have missed that) 00:10 MTDiscord More they where suggesting I host it, but that doesn't matter 00:10 MTDiscord Yes 00:11 MTDiscord A third party server would not be subject to bandwidth and storage limits 00:11 MTDiscord See my comments meming about software to do that tho 00:11 MTDiscord https://github.com/git-lfs/git-lfs/discussions/5583 00:11 MTDiscord Yes, however all those files would still be in the build output which is lgb limit 00:12 MTDiscord Which source covered this 00:13 MTDiscord https://discord.com/channels/369122544273588224/926231483155378176/1338211566889209909 read here down 00:13 MTDiscord I'm on mobile, just google it 00:13 MTDiscord I'm not sure lfs contributes to the page size 00:14 MTDiscord The contents in it will 00:14 MTDiscord I do get that Mark sees LFS as a piece of software which sort of does something we want here. But I think what we need here is simple enough that any half-decent file hosting solution does the job, letting us avoid the problems of Git LFS. 00:14 MTDiscord It shouldn't be building media into the page, it should act identically to your webserver system 00:15 MTDiscord ...... 00:15 MTDiscord Don't ...... me, back up your arguments 00:16 MTDiscord It's going to get bundled into the public directory just as media and the while bundle is deployed 00:16 MTDiscord I'm sure wsor has already backed up his arguments on a local hard disk. Wouldn't want to lose them. 00:17 MTDiscord Maybe I misunderstand what LFS is, because if it just bundled media in the repo then why even have lfs 00:17 MTDiscord It would defeat the purpose 00:17 MTDiscord Yeah, the way I'm currently understanding LFS it's just another layer of indirection (via Git) for basic links. 00:17 MTDiscord Lfs is for large files tracked in git, to avoid the issue of your repo ballooning in size every time there is a change made to them 00:18 MTDiscord Better than me sources that are a Google away for it tho 00:18 MTDiscord I get how this can make some use cases easier (such as backing up the whole repo, including large files), but these aren't very important use cases, and they are still relatively easy to do without LFS. 00:18 MTDiscord I am absolutely not proposing we serve videos over GitHub pages 00:18 MTDiscord I'm sorry if that was the message conveyed, I don't mean that at all 00:19 MTDiscord I don't think anyone thinks you mean that 00:19 MTDiscord this is the result of serving over GH Pages 00:19 MTDiscord I'm on my phone at the moment and figured if people have enough stake in it to argue about this then they should be knowledgeable enough to accurately describe the proposed systen 00:19 MTDiscord I mean, Aldo on my phone 00:19 MTDiscord Half watching the game 00:20 MTDiscord The most boring match-up in the past decade? How's it going? 00:20 MTDiscord well, you guys do what you want. Deploy what you want. I'll ask questions once it's built, I've been 90% confused this whole time. Sorry if I've been annoying, I just really want us to provide a good user experience to new contributors. I'm very scared when I hear things like "trivial grep" -- new contributors will be scared away if our instructions look like that 00:20 MTDiscord Eagles up? I think? Mostly watching ads and then switching back to here 00:21 MTDiscord Same as Mark, I do wonder a slight bit about how the file upload process would look like precisely. 00:21 MTDiscord I feel that if we just have a globally available upload page with no auth or anything, some spambot might come along and cause wsor trouble. Is that a wsor problem? 00:21 MTDiscord That sounds like a cop-out. Dont put it on them when none of us are on the same page 00:21 MTDiscord I don't think new contributors will want to list the large files in our repo 00:23 MTDiscord All we need to do is fill in the gaps and be clearer about the implications. Personally I'd like to understand what LFS is doing as a whole, even though it might be no-op due to self-hosting instability 00:24 MTDiscord The wsor hosting would be limited to -docs members 00:24 MTDiscord External people could just post the video in the pr and a docs member upload it 00:25 MTDiscord Honestly don't see all that many videos anyways 00:25 MTDiscord The process I have in mind for contributions is very simple: 1. Upload file somewhere safe (hosted by wsor), somehow with a simple web interface (?), get a link 2. Write stuff, use the link to reference the file in the PR. 3. profit 4. ??? Same way you'd include a link to a large file just about anywhere on the web, except for places that directly let you upload such files. Frankly we could even just directly use the existing GitHub 00:25 MTDiscord links (or do they ever go stale?) :juanchi_face:, that is, use GitHub PRs / issues as file hosting :juanchi_face: 00:26 MTDiscord That's in the same vein as using discord as a host 00:26 MTDiscord Yep, agreed. Even if we somehow spectacularly messed up the large file process, it probably wouldn't cause too much trouble. Few things need videos for good explanations, and few people will bother to produce good video explanations, and many of the existing proper video tutorials are already hosted reliably e.g. on YouTube, which can just be linked. 00:26 MTDiscord if it works, it works πŸ˜„ 00:27 MTDiscord (It doesnt) 00:27 MTDiscord well with discord there was an unexpected change in availability right 00:27 MTDiscord they added these goofy tokens. i don't think that'll happen anytime soon with publicly hosted stuff on GH. 00:28 MTDiscord Well yes, but also no. They never supported that, it just worked till people abused it 00:28 MTDiscord Is the intent to self-host LFS for a webserver? i.e what wsor already planned to do, but with LFS on top? 00:29 MTDiscord If you use lfs, you would have to block it from the build output, and have some sort of custom solution to make the lfs files nicely accessible 00:29 MTDiscord It could just be a separate repo 00:29 MTDiscord Or yeah, block from build output 00:30 MTDiscord The custom soliution for making the files available would be exactly what you already intend to do 00:30 MTDiscord Sure, still need custom solution to make it publicly accessible and serve it up 00:30 MTDiscord Which at that point I see no advantage to lfs 00:30 MTDiscord The difference being the contents of your webserver is source-controlled via LFS 00:30 MTDiscord Mark highlighted the advantages (repo support/public listing) 00:31 MTDiscord Its simply a question of if those advantages outweigh the disadvantages (not production-ready, extra setup cost) 00:32 MTDiscord Also source controlling media is basically pointless 00:33 MTDiscord Diff is worthless, you could see older versions, for whatever that's worth (not much probabky) 00:33 MTDiscord Pretty sure the point of LFS is to recognize the fact that source control on media should be different 00:33 MTDiscord . S/media/videos 00:35 MTDiscord the only two minor advantages LFS could potentially have would be (quoting the LFS site): > Same Git workflow: Work like you always do on Gitβ€”no need for additional commands, secondary storage systems, or toolsets. > Same access controls and permissions: Keep the same access controls and permissions for large files as the rest of your Git repository when working with a remote host like GitHub. 00:35 MTDiscord The advantage is it keeps it out of .git, and it doubling in size every time since there is no git diff 00:35 MTDiscord Ok ok, remove git LFS. Just use git. LFS only helps with diffs anyway, not a big deal for us for now 00:36 MTDiscord 1. Upload files to repo 2. Open and merge PR on repo 3. Build step deploys to our webserver 4. Files are now available for linking within docs.luanti.org or elsewhere Pros: - Familiar, mature interface - Easy to discover, list, and view large files Cons: - Diffs will be big (not a problem really) 00:37 MTDiscord (again, this is just an idea. Go ahead and deploy whatever, I'm just replying because I was @ed a lot 00:37 MTDiscord Dont GitHub repos also have a size limit? (Not that it should be an issue) 00:37 MTDiscord ) 00:38 MTDiscord Yeah 00:38 MTDiscord Cons: wsor might have legitimate reservations about hosting a LFS server given the state of the software 00:38 MTDiscord If only there were some large files storage extension that allowed us to deploy to our own webserver instead of GitHub... 00:39 MTDiscord ? I thought my proposal was basically wsor's idea but with git + deployment steps 00:39 MTDiscord Your proposal was LFS, and we cannot use GitHub's LFS solution, so we would have to host our own 00:39 MTDiscord Ah, new proposal, I see. Thanks for clarifying, I had thought that was an isolated counterpoint and not the start of a new proposal. 00:39 MTDiscord I said "remove git LFS, just use git" 00:40 MTDiscord (sry, that was in reply to Zenith) 00:40 MTDiscord https://discord.com/channels/369122544273588224/926231483155378176/1338308079011495979 00:40 MTDiscord Xenith* autocorrect 00:41 MTDiscord Once again, I think https://github.com/git-lfs/git-lfs/discussions/5694 solves any "GitHub bandwidth" issues 00:41 MTDiscord Oh 00:42 MTDiscord Yeah that would work 00:42 MTDiscord Not really 00:42 MTDiscord Explain, please 00:42 MTDiscord Why not????? 00:42 MTDiscord You'll run into repo limits, plus pages limits 00:42 MTDiscord No, wsor 00:42 MTDiscord Not at all 00:42 MTDiscord "Git LFS is a command line extension and specification for managing large files with Git" LFS is a spec, not a service 00:42 MTDiscord In any way shape or form 00:42 MTDiscord Please, sources, something, I'm dying here 00:43 MTDiscord That discussion is talking about using your own server to host the files 00:43 MTDiscord im respond to marks put it all in git 00:43 MTDiscord GitHub handles the LFS part, it seems 00:43 MTDiscord Brother what 00:43 MTDiscord By default the Git LFS extension connects to the GitHub LFS service, which has limits, but we can use our own service to get around those limits 00:43 MTDiscord https://discord.com/channels/369122544273588224/926231483155378176/1338307637107753000 00:44 MTDiscord You said "Not really" directly after I sad "That would work" to something entirely unrelated to that proposal 00:44 MTDiscord Use replies 00:44 MTDiscord Yes, if we store large raw files on GitHub, maybe GH will hit us with a "repo too large" 00:44 MTDiscord Hence my everlasting plea to consider Git LFS as a spec. Host the references to the large files in git. Host the actual large files on a webserver. 00:45 MTDiscord Marks proposal is sounding better the more I understand what it actually is 00:45 MTDiscord anyways, im going to summarize to hopefully get us on the same page 1. dumbass wsor hosts external git lfs + some way to serve the contents up on url while blocking the git lfs files from build output 2. dumbass wsor hosts basic file host service those are the two options being currently debated, correct? 00:45 MTDiscord No 00:45 MTDiscord What? 00:45 MTDiscord Not at all 00:45 MTDiscord GitHub handles the LFS, you provide the hosting 00:46 MTDiscord And we don't think you're dumb 😦 00:46 MTDiscord .....what? that makes no sense 00:46 MTDiscord Well I think the way this conversation is being handled is collectively dumb on all our parts 00:46 MTDiscord Meh, it is what it is. It's been hard for me to engage because you all have webserver knowledge I don't have, so I was very lost for a while 00:47 MTDiscord Stop giving up, thanks 00:47 MTDiscord Breaks are not giving up 😦 00:47 MTDiscord if your using lfs, either you use github lfs, or my(or whoevers) externally hosted lfs 00:47 MTDiscord Breaks are very very healthy 00:47 MTDiscord You keep saying "whatever", "it is what it is", "do what you want". Those arent breaks. 00:47 MTDiscord um... agree to disagree? We can discuss 1:1 if you like 00:47 MTDiscord this isnt an airport, you dont need to announce your departure. if you need a break, just take it, or say afk 00:48 MTDiscord OK, that's two in a row... should I go? I'm confused. I'm trying to be honest here about my unavailability as I wasn't sure if I'd be mentioned or expected 00:48 MTDiscord I need to get this out of the way for the future: You may disagree, but that verbiage removes you from the discussion. They can and will move on without you. 00:48 MTDiscord I'm so confused 00:48 MTDiscord You have a legitimate proposal and you keep saying "whatever, do what you want" whenever they disagree (with incomplete information) 00:49 MTDiscord what verbiage? "agree to disagree"? I don't want to discuss someone's definition of "break" in a gc 00:49 MTDiscord Well, I kinda had an idea when I said whatever. And meant it. And then I was @ed a lot. So I came up with a proposal. You're still welcome to move on without me, is that OK? 00:50 MTDiscord You started with the proposal to use LFS, did you not? 00:50 MTDiscord I wouldn't call that a proposal 00:50 MTDiscord Proposal are detailed plans. LFS was a vague idea: maybe a tool we could use somehow 00:50 MTDiscord so uh, let me know when where back to files, thanks 00:50 MTDiscord You're on the team and you've brought it up multiple times, and put in the effort to discuss how it would be used. I'd call that a proposal. 00:50 MTDiscord This is my definition of a proposal 00:51 MTDiscord Yeah can we talk about files instead of meta-discussion in this gc? Happy to discuss meta 1:1, Xenith, I don't mean any offense, really 00:51 MTDiscord Just dont pull the rug from beneath us when some of us (me) are trying to support your ideas. 00:52 MTDiscord I'm sorry, I didn't mean to 00:52 MTDiscord The more I understand LFS, the more this makes sense, and if I understand correctly, it is essentially free to set up 00:52 MTDiscord I am not 100% clear on it, wsor doesnt see how thats the case either 00:52 MTDiscord ok so : https://discord.com/channels/369122544273588224/926231483155378176/1338309947951415386 then: https://discord.com/channels/369122544273588224/926231483155378176/1338310033342988328 then: https://discord.com/channels/369122544273588224/926231483155378176/1338310302839869553 00:53 MTDiscord I just needed to step away because I had been mentioning LFS for a while and gaining very little traction, if any. So I took a break and recognized that setting up something was better than nothing, and others seemed to have a clear idea. I figured, once something was set up, I could look at its actual pros and cons, instead of endlessly discussing vague hypotheticals 00:53 MTDiscord But if I am understanding correctly: GitHub lets you set a file host for LFS (wsor's webserver) and will then use that to store the big files instead of in-repo 00:53 MTDiscord git does, not github 00:53 MTDiscord Yes, Git LFS is a spec, not a service. you follow the spec to point to any file host you want 00:53 MTDiscord GH just hosts git repos, it doesn't need to know you're using Git LFS, and you don't need to use GitHub's LFS service to use git LFS with GitHub 00:54 MTDiscord I'll refer to "traditional GitHub" as "GitHub Repos" for now to clarify 00:54 MTDiscord Therein lies the question: Do we need to self-host LFS or not? 00:55 MTDiscord github has a small base across the whole org, not per repo. otherwise you self host it 00:55 MTDiscord I think we should learn how complex it might be, how hard it might be to serve files, etc. The 1 GiB bandwidth monthly is concerning if it means only 1 GiB worth of videos can be served before things are throttled 00:55 MTDiscord in realistic terms, should self host it 00:55 MTDiscord agreed, we should self-host 00:55 MTDiscord or pay github 00:55 MTDiscord I'll leave any financial decisions to you guys, I'm too new for that 00:56 MTDiscord which is probably a no go due to 00:56 MTDiscord Fine, clearer question: Is there a piece of software we have to host ourselves to leverage LFS? 00:56 MTDiscord Let me do some research πŸ™‚ 00:56 MTDiscord I think we're bike shedding at this point: The cost of the discussion has probably long exceeded any differences the different solutions would have over a relatively long timespan. 00:56 MTDiscord yes 00:56 MTDiscord Strong disagree there! 00:56 MTDiscord I refuse to give in to sunken cost. 00:56 MTDiscord on the bikeshedding. I've learned a lot 00:56 MTDiscord yes, i should have just hosted the damn files instead of starting this, sorry 00:57 MTDiscord You could have hosted the files regardless, since that would be the end result anyway 00:57 MTDiscord Consider it personally valuable bikeshedding (it probably was), but for the purposes of moving the project forward, it is still bikeshedding. 00:57 MTDiscord The only thing this conversation covers is how those files are managed 00:57 MTDiscord Now let's spend our time discussing whether we've really been bikeshedding or not πŸ˜„ 00:57 MTDiscord meta-bikeshedding :itnaul: 00:57 MTDiscord basically everyone uses https://github.com/git-lfs/lfs-test-server or built into there software forge 00:58 MTDiscord Bikeshedding implies uselessness or unproductive activity. This is both useful and productive for the future. 00:58 MTDiscord its funny because its "not production ready" but everyone uses it as such that isnt in a software forge 00:58 MTDiscord I know we in Luanti love to point out when we bikeshed (because we've historically done it a lot) but not all slow discussions are bikeshedding. 00:58 MTDiscord With respect to the scope of this project, I largely disagree. 00:58 MTDiscord there is this list of other options: https://github.com/git-lfs/git-lfs/wiki/Implementations, but there all software forges, abandoned, or other reasons 00:58 MTDiscord oh, we're actually gonna meta-bikeshed? OK, I'll go research LFS lol 00:58 MTDiscord You were supposed to be doing that anyway 00:59 MTDiscord anyways, back to this now, does anyone object that these are the two options currently? 00:59 MTDiscord Still no 00:59 MTDiscord or should we have some more rounds of questions in circles 00:59 MTDiscord We've had what, two videos pop up? We'll have how many videos pop up in the future? The most efficient route would indeed have been for wsor to just slap it on his server and put the links on docs.luant.org. 01:00 MTDiscord what part do you object to 01:00 MTDiscord So do it, it does not negate the value of the discussion 01:00 MTDiscord https://xkcd.com/1205/ 01:00 MTDiscord Your first option combines a lot of assumptions 01:00 MTDiscord And I thought we established the intent was not to serve through pages 01:00 MTDiscord ok, break them out 01:00 MTDiscord do you unironically think that learning isn't valuable? I've learned a lot, seems Xenith has too... 01:01 MTDiscord They are misconstruing productive discussion for productive development 01:01 MTDiscord so your fine with the second point as an established option? debate in circles the first one here? 01:01 MTDiscord ugh, got dragged in. My short answer: discussions are worth it as long as they're moving forward, even if they're slow. It's been literally 1 day. If this was a 3-day thing, maybe I'd start to see any bikeshedding concern. But we are hammering out a proposal, not, well, determining what material to use for a bikeshed. 01:01 MTDiscord I already said to do option 2 because it will be part of option 1 regardless 01:01 MTDiscord Discussions to learn are different from discussions to achieve a certain goal within a project. For the purpose of achieving the goal, the discussion hasn't been very helpful. 01:02 MTDiscord meh, in order to achieve a goal, contributors have to learn what the considerations are, what the options are, etc. 01:02 MTDiscord ok, im going to put on my project leader role and say cease talking about bikesheding, return on investment, etc. this is a team project, and regardless of those things, need to get on the same page, at least for most people to avoid everyone being unhappy, please and thank you 01:02 MTDiscord You yourself pointed out concerns of accessing, uploading, and managing files, which this discussion was intended to address. The hosting part never should have been in question and should have just happened. 01:02 MTDiscord wsor, host the damn files 01:02 MTDiscord This discussion is not related to hosting the files 01:03 MTDiscord It should not have been related, but that was not made clear enough when it started 01:03 MTDiscord Yes, host the files now. I'll see how we can connect them to LFS πŸ™‚ 01:03 MTDiscord Yes, and I think at some point there has been enough of that, and I think we've reached that point and should reach an agreement without concluding the discussion. 01:04 MTDiscord LFS is a management solution meant to be placed on top of the hosting solution, and can be set up separately, and discussing it in that context is not bikeshedding 01:04 MTDiscord (let's move meta discussions to 1:1) 01:06 MTDiscord A large takeaway I have from this discussion is that we need to be very specific about which questions/problems/tasks we are targeting when talking. This is a linear channel and assumptions are dangerous. Whether its making sure we are clear about messages we reply to, or being clear about what an idea intends to solve or do. 01:07 MTDiscord maybe if there are enough of us here, need a "pass the mic" system where a person has the floor for a few minutes and then passes it to the next person, dunno 01:08 MTDiscord A lot of it comes down to us remembering to ask for clarification and assume we know less than we think we do 01:08 MTDiscord haha that's called "a voice chat" 01:09 MTDiscord anyways, before the lfs dumpsterfire proceeds, if im to host the files, one quesiton remains. my domain, or a *.lunati.org one? 01:09 MTDiscord luanti.org of course! 01:09 MTDiscord sub question if option b, what domain 01:09 MTDiscord samsinventory.docs.luanti.org is fine by me 01:09 MTDiscord But if we ever plan to put a video on the main page, for example, maybe just samsinventory.luanti.org 01:10 MTDiscord this is only for the docs repo at this time, in the future that can be addressed 01:10 MTDiscord Really, anything is fine by me as long as it's under luanti.org 01:10 MTDiscord green: any objection on the domain? 01:10 MTDiscord also luatic 01:10 MTDiscord maybe just inventory.luanti.org? Β―_(ツ)_/Β― 01:10 MTDiscord samsinventory.docs.luanti.org currently 01:10 MTDiscord Is there any harm in using a regular subdomain now? 01:11 MTDiscord not really, its more so just for the docs project is what im offering at this time. 01:12 MTDiscord If the work to move it is trivial, I dont care 01:12 MTDiscord and also trying to ward of any potential other people objection for "reasons" by scoping it to us at this time 01:13 MTDiscord i assume you can read between the lines green 01:13 MTDiscord Provided I can parse your grammar first, yes 01:14 MTDiscord Any ol inventory could be tiny .. Sam's inventory is huge ;p 01:14 MTDiscord (also IMO the stranger the better for an internal subdomain) 01:14 MTDiscord so samsinventory.docs.luanti.org pointed at my server for "large files" hosting, the long term set up for hosting those files tbd 01:14 MTDiscord speak now or hold your peace 01:17 MTDiscord @celeron55 when you have a chance could you create an A record for samsinventory.docs.luanti.org at 136.243.154.97 which is my personal server for large file (such as videos) hosting for the docs projects. 01:17 MTDiscord ok, now yall can debate lfs and me hosting it 01:18 MTDiscord or not if you want a break/watch the game/etc 01:19 MTDiscord lol, Chiefs are choking hard. At least it breaks their streak 01:19 MTDiscord still two more quarters tho 01:22 MTDiscord They'd have to get at least 3 or 4 touchdowns + some field goals without letting more goals/tds through. Im not confident, and I dont watch football so I have no idea how good the teams are. 01:23 MTDiscord 3 touch downs + kick ins. and one more touch down only 01:23 MTDiscord touch down is 4 points, kick in is 3 iirc 01:23 MTDiscord while eagles get nothing 01:23 MTDiscord Touchdown is 6 points, 7 with a conversion 01:24 MTDiscord yeah, dumb me, remembered the total was 7, not how it was split 01:24 MTDiscord anyways, point is its possible still, but the odds arent great 01:25 MTDiscord They could tie it with 4 regular tds or 3 conversions + field goal; Still need more after that, and not lose anything 01:25 MTDiscord Not watching the game this year, just checking in to say I know I wasn't perfect, so thanks everyone for a good discussion and for your patience. Glad we got something good deployed today too πŸ™‚ 01:26 MTDiscord i was just watching for the ads till .....this 01:26 MTDiscord The most interesting part of football for me is the point strategies; The plays are too short and the setup is too long personally. 01:26 MTDiscord anyways, seems no interest in discussing lfs atm? so im going to go back to watching 01:27 MTDiscord Unless there is a stable battle-tested LFS server implementation (that I assume would replace whatever webserver you are using?) it seems LFS will wait 01:28 MTDiscord And also a convenient way to keep large files out of the pages build 01:29 MTDiscord thats a decent summary 01:29 MTDiscord glossing over a lot, but yeah 01:31 MTDiscord I'll be researching custom LFS setup, it looks more complicated than I expected (surprise surprise), might send updates in a few days 01:36 MTDiscord i misread this for a moment as "chiefs are cooking hard", which made more sense in my european mind 02:41 mtvisitor happy new year!🀝 02:41 * mtvisitor also likes the website of docs.luanti.org. 02:44 mtvisitor is it possible to add a section of in this website ? 02:48 MTDiscord I would appreciate a misc section for engine/project lore, like about c55 and calinous law and fun history stuff ( @mark.wiemer #181 ) and Minetest Game certainly deserves an entry there. 02:50 mtvisitor okay, glad to know that. 02:51 MTDiscord mtvisitor: we dont want minetest game content. probably just a summary page at best 02:54 mtvisitor it will be good or better if you could add some discription on design or lua script level. 02:54 mtvisitor but it depends on your decision or discussion. 02:55 MTDiscord Its up to MTG to document itself on its own terms. Sure we'll have a description of it, since it is part of the project's history, but its internals dont belong in the docs 02:57 mtvisitor ok, thank you very much for your comment. 03:03 MTDiscord Actually, I see that about now includes c55 and mapgen-evolution/forks; I think a subsection for people (c55, other devs) and history (mapgen evo, forks, MTG) could be in order 03:04 MTDiscord But that can be shuffled later 03:06 MTDiscord i avoid people cause plus privacy and all that 03:06 MTDiscord had the idea cross my mind however 03:06 MTDiscord c55 can get lumped into history then :juanchi_face: 03:06 MTDiscord fine by me πŸ˜› 03:14 MTDiscord If we want subsections, I'm down with team and history, and I do really want a mintest-game-overview page within about because so much of Luanti is tied to it, both historically and in present day mods built for "MTG-compatible" games 03:15 MTDiscord Ixne on the team/people thing for now, but history yes. An MTG section can get added somewhere later (out of scope for organization) 03:17 MTDiscord Maybe MTG in about/history? It is a "Luanti-official" project, right? Feel it deserves a place somewhere in about. But maybe I just really don't want a misc top-level section, as it'd just come off as kinda low-quality 03:17 MTDiscord I want it in history, yes 03:17 MTDiscord But we have no MTG page right now (IIRC?) and adding it would be a different PR 03:19 MTDiscord Correct, no MTG page right now and it's not urgent. But we were on the fence about if we ever wanted one. I say we add one. Brief, covers the overview of the game, mentions that it's a common base game, no new features for the forseeable future, not recommended without mods, etc. Nothing about any internals, aside from links to the GH repo maybe 03:19 MTDiscord We can also throw history up to version 0.4.0 in there (before the modding/game api) 03:20 MTDiscord There was a wiki page somewhere that had info about early versions (showing ye olden trollface pyramids) ... where did that go 03:20 MTDiscord https://tenor.com/view/ahh-gif-15919364902735906323 03:21 MTDiscord MTG-as-engine jumpscare, I know 03:21 MTDiscord changelog-old should still exist 03:21 MTDiscord https://docs.luanti.org/mapgen/evolution/ 03:22 MTDiscord that? 03:22 MTDiscord https://docs.luanti.org/old-changelog/ 03:22 MTDiscord Hm, there's the pyramids. I guess the trollfaces are elsewhere (they will be added). 03:23 MTDiscord Why do we even have an old changelog? 03:23 MTDiscord cause it came from the dev wiki iirc 03:23 MTDiscord Also, shouldnt we just split the changelog into multiple pages (one per version)? 03:23 MTDiscord 🀷 03:23 MTDiscord idc, see if any core dev screams for some reason 03:23 MTDiscord A page-per-version would be a lot cleaner 03:23 MTDiscord Thats a post-5.11 thing 03:24 MTDiscord nice easter egg on google if you search superbowl score 03:24 MTDiscord Cute 03:25 MTDiscord chiefs gained points, but not enough, and didnt block 03:26 MTDiscord I'd keep one big changelog for reference purposes, personally. Easier to search through e.g. "I know this change happened at some point, but when? Let me just ctrl+f the changelog". Usually orgs will do blog posts for individual releases, which we also do, might be good to link them from the docs site somehow. Overall changelog cleanliness is lower priority for me 03:27 MTDiscord Before the day is done, would appreciate some thoughts on https://github.com/luanti-org/dev.luanti.org/issues/181, will probably start implementing the least controversial stuff tomorrow unless folks go wild' 03:27 MTDiscord wild* against the latest proposal 03:27 MTDiscord That is a good point. In which case, I would merge the old changelog as it has no reason to be separate 03:27 MTDiscord was thinking about this. I can do it when I start merging stuff, unless folks go wild about that change specifically, as mentioned above πŸ˜„ 03:28 MTDiscord Are any of the deletions actual deletions? Looks like most are basically renames/swaps 03:28 MTDiscord The deletions are files whose content will be split or merged mostly 03:29 MTDiscord mapgen files are not really split or merged, I guess, but the folder as a whole is "deleted" because its contents are split into different categories in the proposal 03:29 MTDiscord I would put calinous law under mapgen 03:30 MTDiscord for-creators/mapgen, I assume? 03:34 MTDiscord Getting started should be part of the for-creators index, IMO Suggested for-creators subsections (these names suck, come up with something better): * "releasing" or similar for package metadata: distributing, licensing, dependency management, right to a name * "process" or similar for "when modding, remember:": debug, dev tools, troubleshooting, world compat, limitations, hardcoded, lua conventions, lua opt, luajit, mod interop, 03:34 MTDiscord modding tips, programs and editors 03:34 MTDiscord Signing off for the night, happy to read feedback tomorrow evening πŸ™‚ thanks everyone for a good day of discussion, really appreciate all your patience as I asked a million questions, lol 03:34 MTDiscord The idea is to have "getting started" for each audience: getting started for players, getting started for creators, getting started for server hosts... 03:35 MTDiscord Sure, I just mean they should be the index of that section IMO 03:35 MTDiscord If not the index, at least at the top 03:36 MTDiscord Yes, the for-x/_index.md files will generally hold getting started information for sure, sorry I didn't make that clear 03:37 MTDiscord and history: celeron55, mapgen-evolution, forks 03:39 MTDiscord Proposal is πŸ‘ from me; I expect you might find some alterations to make as you are moving things, and things can be tweaked later (better to get it categorized in some way sooner than later) 03:39 MTDiscord Will defs think on further categories within for-creators πŸ™‚ signing off for realsies now! 07:58 MTDiscord That's there now