you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 13 points 3 months ago (5 children)

good! Now the next challenge will be flagging & executing these proposals.

If you come up with an automated system that's not going to provide such high accuracy, then if you rely on manpower alone that's also prone to fail - I think it's a gray area; What's next, a combination of both with human asked to approve on the flagged repos? perhaps

  • source
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 7 points 3 months ago (4 children)

    You can get high accuracy if you don't care about false negatives and only ban the most egregious shit.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [+] 6 points 3 months ago (4 children)
  • [–] 5 points 3 months ago* (2 children)

    I guess if you can find the worst offenders you can ease server load, like if they make pushes around the clock too fast, that's one good signal.

    Like if you have 2000 pushes in a day (pushes, not commits) and it's clearly 24/7, that's probably an autoslopper.

    If someone is not doing that, who cares, the "agents directing agents" folks are the ones that cause the most problems.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 3 months ago (1 child)

    Hm, I'm a heavy pusher. Tho, I don't believe I've gotten past 200 a day

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 2 points 3 months ago

    Git is actually very efficient. You need to be very inefficient with your workflows to cause strain on a git server.

    The fact that you can just host a git server for free and most people don't need to ever worry about limits is a wonder.

  • source
  • parent
  • load more comments (-1 replies)