4 ms·

wouldn't it be better to do this locally before the PR, if the bot's suggestions are valid then the user would have to make another commit. maybe this would wo

wouldn't it be better to do this locally before the PR, if the bot's suggestions are valid then the user would have to make another commit. maybe this would work if a reviewer wanted to highlight code for a question/comment and then the bot could add their two cents

sneak 4y ago
This solution doesn't require the installation of software, or any changes to the existing workflow.
eikenberry 4y ago
It has to be an online service until they get the models more refined and hardware advanced enough that you can run these locally. If you can't run the model locally then it might as well be a service you tie into at the service (eg. github) level. That is, IMO, services are most useful with other services.
- andiareso 4y ago
  I think they are saying the app could be a pre-commit hook where their API is hit before code goes up to remote
  - eikenberry 4y ago
    Yes. I'm saying that due to this relying on an external service it would be inappropriate for a pre-commit hook as you could only commit while online.
    - habitue 4y ago
      pre-push hook?
    - verdverm 4y ago
      git commit --no-verify ?
      - bottled_poe 4y ago
        If the developer wants to slow their own development workflow by delaying the code review, that’s.. concerning.
        verdverm 4y ago
        in what way is your comment pertaining to this thread? If a user is offline, they are not going to be able to push code for review anyway. Either way, it seems prudent to shift validation and checks closer to the developer, before pushing code. Otherwise you end up with a series of commit & push, wait for check, commit & push fixes, wait for check, commit & push more fixes...
    - lwhi 4y ago
      > [...] it would be inappropriate for a pre-commit hook as you could only commit while online. Why does that matter?
      - eurasiantiger 4y ago
        Hey, some of us live in caves.
        eloff 4y ago
        Add the —no-verify flag when working out of your cave.
- dvngnt_ 4y ago
  to clarify, i mean the processing would still be done remotely, but it could be done earlier in the cycle
jhatemyjob 4y ago
No, because that would be way too close to the user, it would be almost impossible to market it as a service you have to pay for ;)
- dev_tty01 4y ago
  Hmm. Not seeing your argument. The company has an API key. Employees query the local service which passes it up to the pay service. What does user executed vs. github commit triggered have to do with anything? What am I missing?
winkmaster 4y ago
The bot does not work like a linter or testing framework, these are suggestions that are subject to discussions, and the pull request is a great place to get reviews from the team

sneak 4y ago

This solution doesn't require the installation of software, or any changes to the existing workflow.

eikenberry 4y ago

It has to be an online service until they get the models more refined and hardware advanced enough that you can run these locally. If you can't run the model locally then it might as well be a service you tie into at the service (eg. github) level. That is, IMO, services are most useful with other services.

andiareso 4y ago
I think they are saying the app could be a pre-commit hook where their API is hit before code goes up to remote
- eikenberry 4y ago
  Yes. I'm saying that due to this relying on an external service it would be inappropriate for a pre-commit hook as you could only commit while online.
  - habitue 4y ago
    pre-push hook?
  - verdverm 4y ago
    git commit --no-verify ?
    - bottled_poe 4y ago
      If the developer wants to slow their own development workflow by delaying the code review, that’s.. concerning.
      - verdverm 4y ago
        in what way is your comment pertaining to this thread? If a user is offline, they are not going to be able to push code for review anyway. Either way, it seems prudent to shift validation and checks closer to the developer, before pushing code. Otherwise you end up with a series of commit & push, wait for check, commit & push fixes, wait for check, commit & push more fixes...
  - lwhi 4y ago
    > [...] it would be inappropriate for a pre-commit hook as you could only commit while online. Why does that matter?
    - eurasiantiger 4y ago
      Hey, some of us live in caves.
      - eloff 4y ago
        Add the —no-verify flag when working out of your cave.
dvngnt_ 4y ago
to clarify, i mean the processing would still be done remotely, but it could be done earlier in the cycle

jhatemyjob 4y ago

No, because that would be way too close to the user, it would be almost impossible to market it as a service you have to pay for ;)

dev_tty01 4y ago
Hmm. Not seeing your argument. The company has an API key. Employees query the local service which passes it up to the pay service. What does user executed vs. github commit triggered have to do with anything? What am I missing?

winkmaster 4y ago

The bot does not work like a linter or testing framework, these are suggestions that are subject to discussions, and the pull request is a great place to get reviews from the team