On Sat, Jan 5, 2013 at 3:48 PM, Daniel Schwen <lists(a)schwen.de> wrote:
What we rather need is monitoring for the instances.
My bots have not been
the problem, so far the source for unreliable bot operation has been the
underlying infrastructure. Be it the moving of home dirs and the read-only
fs or overloaded instances.
On Jan 5, 2013 6:52 AM, "Matma Rex" <matma.rex(a)gmail.com> wrote:
On Sat, 05 Jan 2013 10:03:13 +0100, Matthew
Flaschen <
mflaschen(a)wikimedia.org> wrote:
> For example, on pl.wiki, there are basically only two kinds of bots:
>> interwiki-only and multipurpose. As long as you're not breaking
anything
using the bot and not doing anycontroversial changes,
if you've gotten
the flag, you can do any task you deem necessary. A bot control in this
case simply wouldn't work.
Bots could still tell the dashboard what they're working on, even if
they don't need permission to add a new task.
In this case, when you're saying "bots", you actually mean
"users", as
for
one-time runs it would end up being the
user's job. This simply seems
impractical.
And if we try to make a compromise by making the bots automatically
report
edit summaries somewhere, then well, what's
the improvement over simply
looking at recent changes? You could make a summary of last edits by bots
using two lines of code and one API call, no need for a "control
systems".
______________________________**_________________
Wikitech-l mailing list
Wikitech-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/**mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l<
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l>
_______________________________________________
Wikitech-l mailing list
Wikitech-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l