Re:GitHub Says ‘No Thanks’ to Bots — Even if They’re Nice
by jevinskie on Saturday December 29, 2012 @11:58AM
(#4982595)
Consider bots as "plugins" that you activate on a per-repo basis. I like this idea!
[ Parent
| on HN ]
Re:GitHub Says ‘No Thanks’ to Bots — Even if They’re Nice
by masklinn on Saturday December 29, 2012 @12:53PM
(#4982770)
Isn't that exactly what Service Hooks or OAuth-authed systems provide?
Re:GitHub Says ‘No Thanks’ to Bots — Even if They’re Nice
by uxp on Saturday December 29, 2012 @02:25PM
(#4983101)
I think that's what jevinskie was implying, as in this is a non issue since service hooks are already established so there is no reason bots should be allowed, they should plug into the correct API.
Re:GitHub Says ‘No Thanks’ to Bots — Even if They’re Nice
by masklinn on Saturday December 29, 2012 @03:46PM
(#4983387)
> I think that's what jevinskie was implying
I'm not sure he'd have written that he "likes the idea" and would have failed to mention Service Hooks if he did.
Re:GitHub Says ‘No Thanks’ to Bots — Even if They’re Nice
by uxp on Sunday December 30, 2012 @11:06AM
(#4986073)
I read his comment as either sarcasm or passive aggressiveness.
"Wouldn't it be a great idea if there was a 'hook' mechanism you could opt into that provides a way to add additional functionality to their site from third parties?"
Or maybe not. I don't know, text doesn't convey emotion and body language.