Join GitHub today
GitHub is home to over 28 million developers working together to host and review code, manage projects, and build software together.Sign up
!free help channel command #255
The long overdue !free command which checks for inactivity in all the help channels, and lists them as a suggestion to users to move to a help channel, or switch to one that isn't currently in use.
How it works
note: I really don't expect that last situation to ever be used, but I included it just in case (for you power users out there).
I've set the cooldown for this to once every minute, on a per channel basis. I felt this was the most appropriate, but I am open to other suggestions.
EDIT - Helpers are now exempt from the cooldown
EDIT - Activity timeout is 10 minutes
Finally, any suggestions on my wording for the responses are encouraged.
Sorry, for the messy reviews, seems like I inadvertently deleted some of my comments, so I added them back in later. Also, this is a nice feature to have, I think.
Regarding the cool-down: Should we make an exemption for the time-out from certain staff levels up, like with other commands?
left a comment
Pretty much all of the constants should be added to
Along with a constants class for this cog, the guild's server categories could probably get their own as well.
I'm somewhat concerned about the 5 minute wait before a channel is considered inactive. I have seen a question left for over 10 minutes before but since the channel was considered active and wasn't talked in someone else came along and assisted with it. I'm not sure of a better duration but 5 feels too short, any opinions anyone?
@jos-b I think it's important to note that the feature simply lists the channels in order of inactivity and says "hey, these have been inactive for a while so they're probably your best bet but they might be active". the wording isn't very assertive.
that said, I think we could probably set the duration a tiny bit higher, yeah. 5 minutes does seem short, it might even be less than it takes for someone to answer on average. I'd probably go for something like 10. I think we probably need to test this in production and tune it afterwards, though.
left a comment
I like it!
I've attached two points about your way of handling the error to ensure a traceback is printed and the we reinvoke the command with the same arguments to ensure the user will still get mentioned/the seek depth is passed.