Open Stack

On Thu, Mar 24, 2016 at 09:56:16AM +0100, Thierry Carrez wrote:
> Anita Kuno wrote:
> >[...]
> >So some items that have been raised thus far:
> >- permissions: having a bot on gerrit with +2 +A is something we would
> >like to avoid
> >- "unsanctioned" bots (bots not in infra config files) in channels
> >shared by multiple teams (meeting channels, the -dev channel)
> >- forming a dependence on bots and expecting infra to maintain them ex
> >post facto (example: bot soren maintained until soren didn't)
> >- causing irritation for others due to the presence of an echoing bot
> >which eventually infra will be asked or expected to mediate
> >- duplication of features, both meetbot and purplebot log channels and
> >host the archives in different locations
> >- canonical bot doesn't get maintained
> 
> So it feels like people write their own bot rather than contribute to the
> already-existing infrastructure bots (statusbot and meetbot) -- is there a
> reason for that, beyond avoiding the infra contribution process ?

I tend to find that bots like this are a great little hackday project or
a good way to pick up a new programming language, so maybe that's part
of the reason. :)

// jim

> I was faced with such a decision when I coded up the #success feature, but I
> ended up just adding the feature to the existing statusbot, rather than
> create my own successbot. Are there technical limitations in the existing
> bots that prevent people from adding the features they want there ?
> 
> -- 
> Thierry Carrez (ttx)
> 
> __________________________________________________________________________
> OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
> Unsubscribe: OpenStack-dev-request at lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev