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

Bot instead of AutoShardedBot #87

Closed
isik-kaplan opened this issue May 25, 2018 · 4 comments · Fixed by #93
Closed

Bot instead of AutoShardedBot #87

isik-kaplan opened this issue May 25, 2018 · 4 comments · Fixed by #93
Labels
a: backend Related to internal functionality and utilities (error_handler, logging, security, utils and core) t: enhancement Changes or improvements to existing features

Comments

@isik-kaplan
Copy link

isik-kaplan commented May 25, 2018

https://github.com/discord-python/bot/blob/16f35b5b81f790224c4b6dfcde8486cd73875266/bot/__main__.py#L14

Why not just discord.ext.commands.Bot

@jchristgit
Copy link
Member

what's wrong with autoshardedbot?

@hargoniX
Copy link
Contributor

There is no need for it, autoshardedbot is used if you are on a lot of servers but this bot is only on one.

@jb3
Copy link
Member

jb3 commented May 25, 2018 via email

@lemonsaurus
Copy link
Member

yeah, I think this is worth considering doing a PR for. I don't see us ever needing AutoShardedBot.

jchristgit added a commit that referenced this issue May 29, 2018
jchristgit added a commit that referenced this issue May 29, 2018
@jb3 jb3 closed this as completed in #93 Jun 2, 2018
@MarkKoz MarkKoz added a: backend Related to internal functionality and utilities (error_handler, logging, security, utils and core) t: enhancement Changes or improvements to existing features labels Aug 13, 2021
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
a: backend Related to internal functionality and utilities (error_handler, logging, security, utils and core) t: enhancement Changes or improvements to existing features
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging a pull request may close this issue.

6 participants