Random Chitchat 2017

[xoft]

Funny thing happened. As you might know, the Windows builds run on my home computer. Now I was working on the GalExport plugin and at the same time a build was underway. But because my debugging session had the default port already open, the build-executable wouldn't start and so it failed to generate some of the runtime files - API description, .luacheckrc etc. All this happened silently and I wouldn't have noticed, if I didn't attempt to add LuaCheck to GalExport in that very moment and the CI on GalExport failed, because the API zip file downloaded from the Buildserver was empty.

[Seadragon91]

I started working on a plugin for fuzzing the API 
Have tested cWorld, cRoot and global functions. Current result a few crashes / assertions. Examples:

Code:

cRoot:Get():GetDefaultWorld():ForEachEntity(function(a_Entity) a_Entity:IsA(nil) return true end)

cRoot:Get():GetDefaultWorld():SetBlock(98, -11, -77, -100, -99, -25) -- lua assertion

GetChar(98, -11)

[NiLSPACE]

The server crashing on cEntity:IsA(nil) and GetChar() are bugs, but cWorld:SetBlock asserting is right because the block isn't valid and the last argument you provided is a number while it is an optional bool.

[xoft]

So we'll have a complete fuzzing suite - a tool for fuzzing the plugins, and a plugin for fuzzing the API. I guess we should call it FuzziSuite (yeah, I know, I'm no @tigerw when it comes to puns).

[sphinxc0re]

Just for the record: I just closed every PR up until and including October 2016 as they all seem to be abbandoned

[sphinxc0re]

I'd like to propose a more strict handling of open pull requests: When a PR is opened it will be getting closed after one month if it didn't got merged until then. This keeps out old and untouched PRs and might even speed up the development process. We could add a notice to the PR template on github. Thoughts?

[ThuGie]

What would happen if somebody made a pr thats based on a older one ?
The older one passed the month, so the one thats based on it won't even work anymore.
Or if its a pr that needs a ton of discussing about changes ?

I seen quite some that have a huge discussion between multiple, so at least a month without discussing/activity instead a month after opening.

[sphinxc0re]

@ThuGie exacly what you are stating is what I am trying to solve here. I don't like the current "unstrictness" of our PR system. If someone bases a PR on some other persons PR, its not our problem. If a discussion about a change needs more than a month, something must be wrong with it. Its very strict and it keeps the PR flow steady. If someone really wants some code to be contributed he or she might as well close the PR and do the changes and reopen it afterwards.

[xoft]

I'm so proud of myself, I did some adulting today again, I finally bought a bed

[sphinxc0re]

Wow, you really call it "adulting" I'm impressed and amazed

EDIT: What kind of bed?