zlacker

>>chwtut+(OP)
To play devil’s advocate: We’ve vendored a few open source projects by just asking an LLM to fix obvious bugs that have been open for 12+ months (some projects are abandoned, others active).

If upstream can’t be bothered to fix such stuff (we’re talking major functionality gaps that a $10-100/month LLM can one-shot), isn’t my extremely well tested fix (typically a few dozen or maybe hundred lines) something they should accept?

The alternative is getting hard forked by an LLM, and having the fork evolve faster / better than upstream.

Telling people like me to f—— off is just going to accelerate irrelevance in situations like this.

>>hedora+OB2
Open source projects are under no obligation to accept any patches, AI or human generated. Being the fastest evolving fork may not be their goal.

I'm pretty doubtful a handful of one-shot AI patches is a viable fork. Bug fixes are only one part of the workload.