| ▲ | benrutter 3 days ago | ||||||||||||||||||||||
I think there's a lot of push back on this, but it seems quite sensible based on my experience with open source projects. It's a huge amount of work to maintain a project with a large number of contributions, especially doing things like making sure the PRs don't drift things away from the initial design. Having a bunch of PRs that don't come from a full understanding of the codebase, and drift the project into something inconsistent is a way bigger risk for most projects that "not shipping new features quickly enough". So anyway, please don't paint these folks as "a bunch of luddites who don't understand AI" - they're just doing their best to maintain a successful project in a fast changing world that we're all trying to make sense of. | |||||||||||||||||||||||
| ▲ | OroPla 3 days ago | parent | next [-] | ||||||||||||||||||||||
If the core issue was having too many contributions, wouldn't it have been a better idea to address that? Framed in this way, it looks like a scaling issue and not an AI issue. | |||||||||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||||||||
| ▲ | archagon 2 days ago | parent | prev [-] | ||||||||||||||||||||||
This site is completely AI-pilled. I’ve grown to expect derisive comments for every one of these types of articles. | |||||||||||||||||||||||