Idea: wetfish plays IRC bot development

[nicefish]

All wetfish members get to push code to a repository. If it builds and passes some unit tests, the bot will automatically reload with the new code. If not, the commits will be reverted.

[h]

If it builds and passes some unit tests, the bot will automatically reload with the new code.

do you have any idea what that means

[nicefish]

If it builds and passes some unit tests, the bot will automatically reload with the new code.

do you have any idea what that means

I'm not sure what you mean.

[h]

If it builds and passes some unit tests, the bot will automatically reload with the new code.

do you have any idea what that means

I'm not sure what you mean.

>people on the internet will get to push actual code onto a shell owned by whoever decides to host this

[redheron]

yeah Idk if "anyone can make the bot do whatever they want as long as it works" is a great idea. Maybe if we could vote on them or something before they're implemented. Otherwise seems like a great way to invite tons of channel flood at the very least.

[nicefish]

If it builds and passes some unit tests, the bot will automatically reload with the new code.

do you have any idea what that means

I'm not sure what you mean.

>people on the internet will get to push actual code onto a shell owned by whoever decides to host this

but we'll know who did it, b/c only wetfish members would be allowed to push code.

[nicefish]

yeah Idk if "anyone can make the bot do whatever they want as long as it works" is a great idea. Maybe if we could vote on them or something before they're implemented. Otherwise seems like a great way to invite tons of channel flood at the very least.

you can undo their changes. :)

[redheron]

yeah Idk if "anyone can make the bot do whatever they want as long as it works" is a great idea. Maybe if we could vote on them or something before they're implemented. Otherwise seems like a great way to invite tons of channel flood at the very least.

you can undo their changes. :)

yeah I'd rather have a system in place to prevent malicious changes in the first place rather than having to undo them

assuming someone notices the second channel flood starts, the channel is still flooding before the changes revert.

assuming said changes are as benign and noticable as channel flood.

[here cums the fuck truck]

rather have a single person (like, rachel) with power to commit and revert. automating human trust is seldomly a good idea.

[h]

rather have a single person (like, rachel) with power to commit and revert. automating human trust is seldomly a good idea.

then at that point it's just a collaborative IRC bot project
and that's not fun

[rachel]

rather have a single person (like, rachel) with power to commit and revert. automating human trust is seldomly a good idea.

then at that point it's just a collaborative IRC bot project
and that's not fun

everyone knows it's not fun unless it's ~*risky~*

[redheron]

rather have a single person (like, rachel) with power to commit and revert. automating human trust is seldomly a good idea.

then at that point it's just a collaborative IRC bot project
and that's not fun

everyone knows it's not fun unless it's ~*risky~*

did he shave hearts into his body hair

[Anomaly]

I'll make sure to change everything so it's only on one line

[rachel]

did he shave hearts into his body hair

he kinda reminds me of adrian xD

[rachel]

everyone knows it's not fun unless it's ~*risky~*