Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

Sign up for GitHub

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Jump to bottom

Core, some worlds: Rename sweep_for_events to sweep_for_advancements #3571

Open
wants to merge 4 commits into
base: main
Choose a base branch
from
Open

Core, some worlds: Rename sweep_for_events to sweep_for_advancements #3571

wants to merge 4 commits into from
+51 −46

Conversation

NewSoupVi
Copy link
Member

@NewSoupVi NewSoupVi commented Jun 20, 2024 •
edited
Loading

Seems like we're going with the "advancement" naming now, and I have recent evidence that people think this function is referring to address = None. So let's try to get away from the old "event" naming and be consistent about "event" meaning address = None and "advancement" meaning "will be picked up by sweep_for_events / etc."

I wasn't sure about the event parameter on collect. I feel like that one might be used slightly differently? Lmk what you think about that one.

@NewSoupVi NewSoupVi changed the title Core: Rename sweep_for_events to sweep_for_advancements Core, some worlds: Rename sweep_for_events to sweep_for_advancements Jun 20, 2024
@github-actions github-actions bot added affects: core Issues/PRs that touch core and may need additional validation. waiting-on: peer-review Issue/PR has not been reviewed by enough people yet. labels Jun 20, 2024
@NewSoupVi NewSoupVi marked this pull request as draft June 20, 2024 02:18
@NewSoupVi NewSoupVi added the waiting-on: world-maintainer Issue/PR is waiting for feedback or approval by the maintainer of a world. label Jun 20, 2024
@NewSoupVi NewSoupVi marked this pull request as ready for review June 20, 2024 02:24
@NewSoupVi
Copy link
Member Author

NewSoupVi commented Jun 20, 2024 •
edited
Loading

@Alchav (Can't request review)

@beauxq
Copy link
Collaborator

beauxq commented Jun 20, 2024

no deprecated sweep_for_events to not break apworlds?

@NewSoupVi
Copy link
Member Author

no deprecated sweep_for_events to not break apworlds?

My bad, I had that, and then I accidentally removed it again lol

@NewSoupVi
Copy link
Member Author

NewSoupVi commented Jun 20, 2024 •
edited
Loading

Approval from Espeon is implicit as per https://discord.com/channels/731205301247803413/1214608557077700720/1253206955879694336

@NewSoupVi NewSoupVi added the is: refactor/cleanup Improvements to code/output readability or organizization. label Jun 20, 2024
Jouramie
Jouramie approved these changes Jun 27, 2024
View reviewed changes
Copy link
Contributor

@Jouramie Jouramie left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I confirm that this was super confusing when first getting into AP. Good change 👍

@Alchav
Copy link
Contributor

Alchav commented Jun 27, 2024

@Alchav (Can't request review)

What, do you really need my approval to rename a core function just because I use it?

@NewSoupVi
Copy link
Member Author

NewSoupVi commented Jun 27, 2024 •
edited
Loading

Alchav (Can't request review)

What, do you really need my approval to rename a core function just because I use it?

That is the current procedure, yes - If something touches a world, the world maintainer has to approve.

We have discussed changing this in the (recent) past, some ppl argued that we shouldn't need to do this, but some world maintainers have said they want to continue to be required to sign off on anything touching their world.

Happy to discuss solutions in the Discord.

agilbert1412
agilbert1412 approved these changes Jun 27, 2024
View reviewed changes
Copy link
Collaborator

@agilbert1412 agilbert1412 left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

1: Approved, that seems like a good thing
2: Why was I requested to review this?
3: Note for the future, if something requires approval from Stardew, even though technically it's my name on it, I consider if Jouramie approves it, it's good enough, as he wrote most of that world with me and is arguably even more qualified than me to approve things related to it

worlds/alttp/test/dungeons/TestDungeon.py Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
@NewSoupVi NewSoupVi added waiting-on: core-review Issue/PR has been peer-reviewed and is ready to be merged or needs input from a core maintainer. and removed waiting-on: world-maintainer Issue/PR is waiting for feedback or approval by the maintainer of a world. waiting-on: peer-review Issue/PR has not been reviewed by enough people yet. labels Jun 27, 2024
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Reviewers

@Jouramie Jouramie Jouramie approved these changes

@agilbert1412 agilbert1412 agilbert1412 approved these changes

@Alchav Alchav Alchav approved these changes

@Berserker66 Berserker66 Awaiting requested review from Berserker66 Berserker66 is a code owner

@espeon65536 espeon65536 Awaiting requested review from espeon65536

At least 1 approving review is required to merge this pull request.

Assignees
No one assigned
Labels
affects: core Issues/PRs that touch core and may need additional validation. is: refactor/cleanup Improvements to code/output readability or organizization. waiting-on: core-review Issue/PR has been peer-reviewed and is ready to be merged or needs input from a core maintainer.
Projects
None yet
Milestone
No milestone
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet
5 participants
@NewSoupVi @beauxq @Alchav @Jouramie @agilbert1412