01:37:39 monster corrosion isn't stackable like player corrosion, right? I'm looking at the code and that's how it appears to me, but I want to make sure 01:39:18 actually I am sure, never mind 01:40:38 assuming I'm not very dumb and wrong about that, then, I think the "monster got corroded" message could be a little clearer about the fact that it is refreshing a duration instead of increasing the degree 01:41:32 I definitely used it believe it stacked on monsters like it does on players 01:42:58 something like "The death yak is splashed with acid! The death yak looks like it will be corroded longer." 01:43:49 instead of repeating "The death yak is splashed with acid! The acid corrodes the death yak!" both times 01:44:21 (just watched a friend waste many charges of low-evo acid trying to stack it on a death yak, is what brought it to mind) 02:38:03 Unstable branch on crawl.develz.org updated to: 0.24-a0-203-gf0bc1e9 (34) 03:08:46 Windows builds of master branch on crawl.develz.org updated to: 0.24-a0-203-gf0bc1e9 04:00:11 Monster database of master branch on crawl.develz.org updated to: 0.24-a0-203-gf0bc1e9 04:13:48 -!- amalloy is now known as amalloy_ 11:40:33 Still mesmerized even after LOS to siren is interrupted 13https://crawl.develz.org/mantis/view.php?id=11937 by iliketurtles 12:37:35 -!- amalloy_ is now known as amalloy 12:53:39 huh, player::possible_beholder is a bit weird. it writes: cell_see_cell(pos(), mon->pos(), LOS_SOLID_SEE) && mon->see_cell_no_trans(pos()) but monster::see_cell_no_trans just delegates to cell_see_cell with a different set of arguments 12:54:10 it doesn't seem incorrect, but i'd rather have it depend on one fewer function, by calling cell_see_cell twice (or once, if there's a los_type that covers both) 12:56:42 which, actually, LOS_SOLID_SEE seems to be the most restrictive los_type possible, so if the first call returns true the second should always return true 15:25:17 03advil02 07[stone_soup-0.22] * 0.22.1-58-gf424fa9: Update changelog date for 0.22.2 tagging 10(5 minutes ago, 1 file, 1+ 1-) 13https://github.com/crawl/crawl/commit/f424fa918fe8 16:16:34 advil: getting ready to release 0.23.2? 16:16:50 well, sooner or later 16:17:01 I'm doing 0.22.2 first, because it's easier 16:17:08 I still have to do some windows testing for 0.23.2 16:21:31 oops hm I guess I should have done the debian changelog before tagging 16:36:57 yeah, it works better if you do it that way 16:37:15 but you can just modify the debian changelog before you make the package as well 16:37:36 pdebuild complains if the changelog is not correctly formatted 17:10:12 huh, why do we use .xz? 17:13:58 it's just better compression 17:14:31 and I think for the people downloading those files, they have an unarchiver that can open those 17:15:36 E: debootstrap failed [...] mount: /proc: permission denied. 17:16:29 did you run the build command as root? 17:16:37 yeah, with sudo 17:16:49 hrm 17:18:12 doing this from an ubuntu docker image, do you usually use ubuntu? maybe I should try debian stable (sigh)? 17:18:22 I use ubuntu on aws, yeah 17:20:11 advil: I should mention though that the COW OS is debian 17:20:23 but my host machine is ubuntu 17:20:44 maybe related: https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=901723 17:21:00 well, I'll have to debug later, got to go for now 17:49:15 New branch created: pull/1020 (1 commit) 13https://github.com/crawl/crawl/pull/1020 17:49:15 03Joshua Gelbard02 07https://github.com/crawl/crawl/pull/1020 * 0.24-a0-204-g6a8d073: Add new message for re-corroding a corroded foe 10(14 hours ago, 1 file, 4+ 3-) 13https://github.com/crawl/crawl/commit/6a8d0735acf9 18:02:28 vault contributions https://crawl.develz.org/tavern/viewtopic.php?f=19&t=26218 20:42:13 -!- amalloy is now known as amalloy_ 21:01:39 -!- amalloy_ is now known as amalloy 21:30:57 gammafunk: should this line be nodeps? https://github.com/crawl/crawl/blob/master/crawl-ref/docs/develop/release/debian.txt#L131 21:31:15 advil: yes 21:31:17 i.e. you build the .deb off nodeps, right? 21:31:17 ok 21:31:19 thanks 21:31:30 fixed the /proc error? 21:32:19 yeah, I needed to run the docker image with --privileged 22:07:07 03advil02 {GitHub} 07* 0.24-a0-204-g6c8b4eb: Small tweaks to the .deb guide 10(13 seconds ago, 1 file, 6+ 3-) 13https://github.com/crawl/crawl/commit/6c8b4ebd3a96 22:17:13 Unstable branch on crawl.kelbi.org updated to: 0.24-a0-204-g6c8b4ebd3a (34) 22:55:19 03advil02 07[stone_soup-0.22] * 0.22.1-59-ge965b3a: Update debian changelog 10(78 seconds ago, 1 file, 5+ 0-) 13https://github.com/crawl/crawl/commit/e965b3aba33e 23:01:34 hm, what is the origin repo exactly for ~/dcss-website on cdo? 23:02:30 is it just https://github.com/crawl/dcss-website ? 23:03:08 slightly confused about what I need to do to update download.htm 23:03:16 I think I've managed to do everything else, though 23:04:18 oh, I guess that file doesn't get updated for the non-current release 23:04:24 so for 0.22.2 I'm done 23:04:29 assuming that all worked 23:26:01 03advil02 07[stone_soup-0.23] * 0.23.1-38-g628c18f: Changelog updates for a 0.23.2 release 10(63 seconds ago, 1 file, 21+ 0-) 13https://github.com/crawl/crawl/commit/628c18f42322 23:36:43 advil: yes, that's only for current stable 23:36:56 advil: and yeah, that's the repo for the website; you can push there and pull from CDO 23:37:01 then manually copy the file 23:37:05 to ~/website 23:37:09 at least that's what I do 23:37:20 ok, I'll have to give that a shot when I do 0.23.2 23:37:52 aside from that (and assuming everything worked) I've now done the whole release process, so I guess now we have two people who know how to do it! 23:37:57 great 23:38:14 if you feel like doing the wordpress release post, you can use the previous post as a template 23:38:38 ok, yeah, when I do the rest I'll do a release post for 0.23.2 and mention the 0.22.2 release 23:38:46 maybe in the next few days 23:38:52 thanks for doing all that 23:39:05 no problem 23:39:44 does anybody else have anything they urgently hope to be fixed in 0.23.2? I may try to tag by friday or so? 23:40:01 I wish I could replicate this mac menu bug that's around 23:41:15 there are definitely some notable bugs still, but they're probably all eventual 0.24 and possible later backport material 23:42:03 that bug where ghosts can get shafted out of ghost vaults seems sort of bad 23:42:03 oh right 23:42:03 yeah, that might be good to fix 23:42:21 is it not just a matter of either (i) reverting the ghost shaft commit or (ii) removing shafts from the vaults? 23:42:48 it is, it's just the only vault that places them is thematically based on there being a shaft 23:42:53 ah 23:43:00 ebering: any thoughts on the shaft ghost vault shafting ghosts now situation? 23:43:06 since that's your vault 23:43:10 there is also that annoying stuff with clinging and invisible monsters behind glass interrupting autoexplore 23:43:19 but this is a substantial bug that's not a quick fix I think 23:44:14 oh, simple issue I can probably take a sec to fix now re: dig trove 23:46:49 god, does trove_dig really have a place in this world 23:47:24 I'm ok with it not 23:55:39 03gammafunk02 07* 0.24-a0-205-g1d96822: Remove a digging Trove 10(7 minutes ago, 1 file, 0+ 40-) 13https://github.com/crawl/crawl/commit/1d96822bd8ed