On the other hand, if editing software checked for some particular
software, the bot would have nothing to do.
So, maybe the bot is a good temporary solution until the map editors have
it implemented?
Also, it would be a good way to detect edits with new software that hes no
checking implemented.
> * do not message the same person twice about the same kind of problem
and I would support this. The other problem is how recent was the
mapping. If its more than a week old they may have corrected the way they
work after it had been brought to their attention by another mapper.
Cheerio John
Hi,
On 04/04/18 10:44, Michał Brzozowski wrote:
> What do you think about it? Are such bots useful or not?
The bot programmer must take extreme care not to make their bot an
annoyance. In my opinion this would include:
* do not message the same person twice about the same kind of problem
* at
I think the more we can do to automate QA, the better.
There should be some common sense guidelines for running bots though:
* user names with “bot” in them
* user profiles that say what the bot does and where the source code is
* common place on GitHub for bot development (osmlab/bots?)
>
CC: osm<mailto:talk@openstreetmap.org>
Onderwerp: Re: [OSM-talk] QA bots commenting on changesets - your thoughts?
2018-04-04 10:44 GMT+02:00 Michał Brzozowski
<www.ha...@gmail.com<mailto:www.ha...@gmail.com>>:
There's a bot in Poland that comments on changesets which br
2018-04-04 10:44 GMT+02:00 Michał Brzozowski :
> There's a bot in Poland that comments on changesets which break addresses
> (e.g. combining addr:place with addr:street), along with an explanation and
> links to forum topic.
> What do you think about it? Are such bots useful
There's a bot in Poland that comments on changesets which break addresses
(e.g. combining addr:place with addr:street), along with an explanation and
links to forum topic.
What do you think about it? Are such bots useful or not?
Michał
___
talk mailing
7 matches
Mail list logo