Topics for online voice chat meeting August 30th 2022

[Vezzra]

This is the topics thread for our next online voice chat meeting on Tuesday, August 30th 2022.

Please post suggestions for topics and discuss them here.

[Vezzra]

Sorry that I'm so late this time with the announcement postings.

@Geoff, since you're traveling, will you be able to attend on Tuesday?

[Grummel7]

I suggest to discuss C++ code checking.
A bug like this should not pass unnoticed.

[o01eg]

State of FreeOrion release.
Publication weekly test build binaries to SourceForge from Github Actions CI.

[Ophiuchus]

Kid was ill yesterday, missed the meeting again. Please one share output?

[Vezzra]

Kid was ill yesterday, missed the meeting again. Please one share output?

Geoff hasn't been attending too, so not too much has been discussed. Will try to post a short summary this weekend.

[Vezzra]

Didn't get around to it yet, but will try to post a short summary next week.

[Vezzra]

Sorry once again, I've been quite busy recently, and didn't have much time for FO stuff.

The probably most important thing to note here was the state of the upcoming 0.5 release. The problem seems to be that stuff keeps being added by people which they want to get into the release, so the list of open issues and PRs assigned to the 0.5 milestone doesn't really get smaller. On the contrary, I just checked, we are now (at the time of this posting) at 28 open issues and PRs.

So, the consensus was that we need to put a stop to new things being added. I shall monitor the milestone list until our next meeting (end of September), and then reevaluate the situation. At that next meeting we'll most likely decide what really needs to go in, and put a stop to more stuff being added.

There is not much to say regarding automated publication of the binary only test builds, o01eg has implemeted it in the meantime, it should be merged soon.

Grummel7, do you want to add anything regarding the C++ code checking topic?

Anything else I forgot that should be mentioned? Grummel7, o01eg?

[o01eg]

We also add label "status:needs save" to mark issues which requires save to reproduce issue.

[Geoff the Medio]

A bug like this should not pass unnoticed.

Exactly what you consider to be the bug there isn't clear... The unused variable being constructed, or the updating of all objects rather than just one / a subset? Updating all isn't in of itself a bug, as it's more of a design choice between updating all objects for accuracy and consistency vs. a subset of object for speed. Setting up a container to specify some objects and then not using it is rather more bugish, though there might already have been unused variable warnings for that in the build logs.

[wobbly]

28 open issues

The actual number is a little confusing though. I count at least 1 that is done and not closed (https://github.com/freeorion/freeorion/issues/3207) .2 that are actually the same issue and have a PR that is not yet merged (https://github.com/freeorion/freeorion/issues/4127 and https://github.com/freeorion/freeorion/issues/4128) and a few more that are maybe done, maybe not, for instance https://github.com/freeorion/freeorion/issues/3958 could be closed, or it could be improved on.

[Oberlus]

I closed the lingering issue of Trencher's missing description.

About the Pedia updates issues, I guess the ideal state would be with named values in anything that can change when changing default values, but that having the values updated to current defaults is already an advancement and could be enough for release if time is tight.

[Grummel7]

Setting up a container to specify some objects and then not using it is rather more bugish, though there might already have been unused variable warnings for that in the build logs.

Perhaps bug is too much of a word here, at least it does not break anything.
But constructing a container and then not using it is at least suspicious and i would expect to get a warning when writing such a code. It may be a real problem and if it is intended, the warning can be eliminated by not constructing the container and leaving the argument nameless.

[Ophiuchus]

For the next chat: we should fix the supply issues with allied supply. there are multiple ones and maybe can be solved with a single solution:

here is what i am aware of

• one turn wrong effects on colonisation (out of own supply)
• multiple empires per system do not really work
• planet may cut off allied supply. e.g. a zero-supply colony next to a high-supply allied system cutting off an asymetric supply connection (e.g. a 4-supply system would reach 4 hops, but only works up to the first allied colony)

also the question if this should go in after 0.5

[BlueAward]

For the next chat: we should fix the supply issues with allied supply. there are multiple ones and maybe can be solved with a single solution:

here is what i am aware of

• one turn wrong effects on colonisation (out of own supply)
• multiple empires per system do not really work
• planet may cut off allied supply. e.g. a zero-supply colony next to a high-supply allied system cutting off an asymetric supply connection (e.g. a 4-supply system would reach 4 hops, but only works up to the first allied colony)

also the question if this should go in after 0.5

Also there's this other thread about supply connection through 2 empires, I would expect this to actually work if the other two empires are allied to themselves as well. Especially relevant in a team of 3+ people per team, where everybody within the team is in alliance to everybody else in that team by design