Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Need more chaos #48

Merged
merged 2 commits into from
May 23, 2017
Merged

Conversation

Zidail
Copy link
Contributor

@Zidail Zidail commented May 23, 2017

1pk557

@DasSkelett
Copy link
Contributor

Nope, in order to prevent PRs like this.

@ghost
Copy link

ghost commented May 23, 2017

Outstanding attempt, though. I kinda want to +1 it just for that...

@chaosbot chaosbot merged commit 9500e94 into Chaosthebot:master May 23, 2017
@rhengles
Copy link
Member

What

@mrhwick
Copy link
Contributor

mrhwick commented May 23, 2017

Well that didn't take long.

@romgrk romgrk mentioned this pull request May 23, 2017
chaosbot added a commit that referenced this pull request May 23, 2017
This reverts commit 9500e94, reversing
changes made to fda0309.

This is being reverted on a technicality, because the `votes` variable name was
not defined in chaos.py, it was killing the server.
@Ajedi32
Copy link

Ajedi32 commented May 23, 2017

Uh... so is there a bug in the vote counting code or something? The merge commit (9500e94) claims there were only two votes on this PR (both in favor), when in reality there were over a hundred.

@geekyi
Copy link

geekyi commented May 23, 2017

Possible explanation for why this got merged: #82 (comment)

@hongaar hongaar mentioned this pull request May 24, 2017
@rudehn rudehn mentioned this pull request May 24, 2017
chaosbot added a commit that referenced this pull request May 24, 2017
#152: Voting threshold

Description:
There should be a voting threshold (it's actually a threshold on the votes _difference_).

Set to 1% of repo followers (currently, that means the difference between 👍 and 👎 should be at least 12).

Prevents things like #138 and #48.

Maybe we can change this later to use a percentage of active contributors instead of (possibly passive) stargazers? Not sure how to calculate that atm though.

:ok_woman: PR passed with a vote of 18 for and 2 against, with a weighted total of 16.0 and a threshold of 1.0.

Vote record:
@ECrownofFire: 1
@manawasp: -1
@Vad1mo: 1
@andrewda: 1
@bperson: 1
@chipironcin: 1
@davidak: 1
@frazr: 1
@hongaar: 1
@kurokikaze: 1
@lukeramsden: 1
@pivotal-avenkatesh: 1
@qgustavor: 1
@reddraggone9: 1
@rhengles: 1
@richardjonathonharris: 1
@rudehn: 1
@tarunbatra: -1
@viktorsec: 1
@xyproto: 1
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

8 participants