That's not what public keyservers are for. You're free to use it any other way, but it's unreasonable to shame people who used the keys you advertised in a way that matches general expectations.
Besides, it doesn't make sense to upload keys only meant to be shared among a small number of people to a public keyserver. In your case, the keys better belong in the git repo.
I feel like that defeats the purpose of the validation. If you're storing the keys in the same place as the code, it would be very easy if someone gained malicious access to the repo to change the key and sign it with the new key.
I thought the commenter was using the repo for a password store, not executable code? The only consequence of not validating that would be them entering invalid credentials. Even if they’re dealing with code, watching out for new commits that change keys is enough. That’s something that people should be doing when using keyservers too.
Anyway, the point is public keyservers aren’t a good match for the described use case. If the key is meant to be kept private, it should be shared privately.
Besides, it doesn't make sense to upload keys only meant to be shared among a small number of people to a public keyserver. In your case, the keys better belong in the git repo.