Don't always send dummy respawn#1299
Open
OptimisticDeving wants to merge 1 commit into
Open
Conversation
Member
|
This would make it no longer sent, ever, if installed on the backend |
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
2 participants
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Should fix a regression introduced by 29d3787, forcing keep attributes respawns to work like non-keep attribute respawns, causing the client to forget chunks & the server to not resend them, leading to hacky workarounds like this (good thing it doesn't run on Velocity proxies, or otherwise I wouldn't have figured this out :P).
Keep attribute respawns are invoked when a Paper plugin makes a change to a player's profile (for example, changing their skin).
In theory, world changes should always be non-keep attribute respawns, but I kept the old world name check just in-case my assumption is wrong and causes another regression.
I don't know if this is the best fix, but I have tested it and am unable to reproduce #381 with this patch applied or what the comment describes.