On 23/03/16 16:27 -0400, Anita Kuno wrote:
Bots are very handy for doing repetitive tasks, we agree on that.Bots also require permissions to execute certain actions, require maintenance to ensure they operate as expected and do create output which is music to some and noise to others. Said output is often archieved somewhere which requires additional decisions. This thread is intended to initiate a conversation about bots. So far we have seen developers want to use bots in Gerrit[0] and in IRC[1]. The conversation starts there but isn't limited to these tools if folks have usecases for other bots. I included an item on the infra meeting agenda for yesterday's meeting (April 22, 2016) and discovered there was enough interest[2] in a discussion to take it to the list, so here it is. 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
To be honest, I wouldn't mind having a bot +2A on specific cases. An example would be requirements syncs that have passed the gate or trasnlations. I normally ninja-approve those and I don't really mind doing it but, I wouldn't mind having those patches approved automatically since they don't really require a review. Flavio
- "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 It is possible that the bots that infra currently maintains have features of which folks are unaware, so if someone was willing to spend some time communicating those features to folks who like bots we might be able to satisfy their needs with what infra currently operates. Please include your own thoughts on this topic, hopefully after some discussion we can aggregate on some policy/steps forward. Thank you, Anita. [0] http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/irclogs/%23openstack-infra/%23openstack-infra.2016-03-09.log.html#t2016-03-09T15:21:01 [1] http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-dev/2016-March/089509.html [2] http://eavesdrop.openstack.org/meetings/infra/2016/infra.2016-03-22-19.02.log.html timestamp 19:53 __________________________________________________________________________ OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
-- @flaper87 Flavio Percoco
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
__________________________________________________________________________ OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
