I think the real irony is an LLM trying to enforce permissions at all. Why is it doing that? If the tag exists, the user had the permission to create it, no?
It looks like the status/need-triage label was removed
61–70 of 87 posts
Re: It looks like the status/need-triage label was removed
#62Now that's what I call job security.
Re: It looks like the status/need-triage label was removed
#63It's easy to miss, but in the middle of the page: > 4609 remaining items Seems gemini-cli and gemini-cli didn't understand who themselves were, so they though someone else added/removed the label, which it tried to correct, which the other then tried to correct, which the other... Considering that that repository has what seems like ~10 longer term contributors, who probably get email notifications, together with a b…
The owner is a Google employee, but for the sake of safety it should be owned by a real Google org. I've just asked them to migrate it to their OSS org. Unfortunately the app creation flow on GitHub makes it impossible (for now) for a normal org user to create an app for the org, so apps end up getting created on personal accounts and become load bearing. We've got a work item to make it possible to give app creation…
Dear god. This reminds me of all of the things in Google that are "load bearing" and have to be owned by random gmail accounts instead of formal service accounts or org accounts.
How long has this one been on the roadmap for? (since you actually work for github)
Re: It looks like the status/need-triage label was removed
#64Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'm kind of understanding, I think, but not fully. Regardless of how you structure this bot, there will be one entrypoint for the webhooks/callbacks, right? Even if there is sub-behaviours, the incoming event is passing through something, or are we talking about "sub-bots" here that are completely independent and use different GitHub users and so on? Otherwise I still don't see how you'd end up with your own bot gett…
1. Set up a bot that runs on every new comment on a PR 2. The bot comments something on that PR Doesn't have to be more advanced than this to get an infinite loop if you don't build anything where it ignores comments from itself or similar.
Previously:
> pretty much the second or third step is "Huh, probably this shouldn't be able to reply to itself, then it'll get stuck in a loop". But that's hardly a "classic CI bug",
Re: It looks like the status/need-triage label was removed
#65This will soon be happening with our parents' social security checks, our friend's cancer treatment plan, our international flights logistics, our ISPs routing configurations, ...
Fun times are coming.
Re: It looks like the status/need-triage label was removed
#66Earlier quoted context omitted.
Some are saying there is no more room for junior employees in all of this, but it seems like these LLM spasms generate lots of disruption that would be at appropriate levels of complexity and priority for juniors to be handling.
What if a junior with an LLM did this?
What about an LLM with a junior?
Re: It looks like the status/need-triage label was removed
#67To be clear, is AI actually at play here, aside from the fact that the repo is for Gemini? It just looks like two simple rules that interact poorly, that we could've seen in 2015.
Re: It looks like the status/need-triage label was removed
#68Heh. This reminds me of the time when our newly hired "Salesforce Expert" improved our support queue: Every time Support received a new email, a ticket in Salesforce would be created and assigned to Support Every time Support was assigned a new ticket, Salesforce would send a notification email The worst part is he wouldn't admit to the mistake and it took us forever to find where he buried the rule.
Maybe 20 years ago... As a student, the school had an email server that allowed rules to be set. You could set an email to be sent as a result of another email. IT were not stupid though, and set a series of rules: 1. You cannot have a rule trigger to email yourself. 2. You cannot reply to an email triggered by a rule. 3. You have ~50MB max of emails (which was a lot at the time). Playing around one lunch, my friend…
[deleted]
Re: It looks like the status/need-triage label was removed
#69Earlier quoted context omitted.
I only used salesforce once (was “forced” to use it haha) and it was mind boggling how anyone would ever want to use it or even become an expert in using it. I’d rather track everything in a giant excel tyvm
nobody who actually uses salesforce for daily work chose it. it's sold directly to CIO/CTOs as a one-stop shop for CRM, ticketing, reports and biz dev, who may occasionally use it for reporting (but more often get their staff to provide the reports directly to them). everybody stuck having to use it to actually track work just has to suffer with it.
Isn't this the SAP businesscase as well?
Re: It looks like the status/need-triage label was removed
#70Script author here :-) This was due to two different GitHub Action workflows:
(Workflow 1): Remove the need-triage label under certain conditions.
(Workflow 2): If anyone outside a project maintainer removes a label, re-add it with a friendly message explaining why.
Submitted those at like 10 or 11 pm and went to sleep. Woke up to all issues that got changed overnight with dozens, hundreds, or thousands of these messages.
Cause: Workflow 2 should have checked for project maintainers but also other bots and automation that might also be clearing labels. It got fixed immediately once we realized the issue.