What immich, ente, and the others weren’t enough? Had to still vibe code your own?
And I’m saying this as someone who enjoys vibe coding a few projects. I’m not against it. But it’s arrogance to assume you can vibe code something better than proven OSS alternatives
I didn’t make it, but I don’t see why people get upset that there are more of these projects out there. Something existing certainly never stopped people from making their own before either.
Making your own and creating it is great. Maintaining it for years its great. Its why there is so much respect for other projects. You can see the months and years of dedication right in the git history.
Vibe coding something and trying to be on par with the other projects is hubris. It’s assuming you can do a better job than the groups and maintainers with an AI tool. Then to make it worse, it will probably never be updated or maintained. That’s why I and I assume others dislike it. It’s minimal effort with the arrogance on top.
Like I said. I enjoy vibe coding things. I’ve done a few. However I don’t go and pitch them as alternatives to well known OSS projects, because I know my vibe coding could never compare.
Again, I don’t really see the difference here. Whether the authors continue to maintain the project long or not has little to do with what tools were used to build the project. And calling anything where LLMs are used for development vibecoding is just silly to be honest. There’s a huge variation in quality of code both in hand written code and that where LLMs are used. What you should be looking at in both cases is how much usage project gets, how good the tests are, whether authors built useful things before, and so on.
If a project is useful then I really don’t care how it’s coded. Existing projects are in no way diminished by the fact that this project exists.
Correct, and again, I’m someone who uses AI, I’m not one of the ones who are purely against it. The definition what what I’ve both done and seen:
Using LLMs to code - fine. It’s a tool, use it as you’re saying. This is not what I’m talking about.
Using LLMs to vomit out all of your code into one commit is vibecoding. It’s clearly vibecoding when there weren’t even multiple commits. No trial and error, no refinement, just one giant dump.
I do care how it’s coded because it shows how well it will be maintained into the future. If someone uses LLMs over months to build something it will probably be maintained. If someone vomited out all of that code in one vibecoded session, it’s very likely they’ll be bored and in a month it’ll be abandoned. That’s what I’m looking at, because tests can be automated now.
Maybe I’ll be wrong and in a month they’ll have committed hundreds of times and are trying to mature it. I have no evidence of that though, so there is no reason I’d risk trying it out.
What immich, ente, and the others weren’t enough? Had to still vibe code your own?
And I’m saying this as someone who enjoys vibe coding a few projects. I’m not against it. But it’s arrogance to assume you can vibe code something better than proven OSS alternatives
I didn’t make it, but I don’t see why people get upset that there are more of these projects out there. Something existing certainly never stopped people from making their own before either.
Making your own and creating it is great. Maintaining it for years its great. Its why there is so much respect for other projects. You can see the months and years of dedication right in the git history.
Vibe coding something and trying to be on par with the other projects is hubris. It’s assuming you can do a better job than the groups and maintainers with an AI tool. Then to make it worse, it will probably never be updated or maintained. That’s why I and I assume others dislike it. It’s minimal effort with the arrogance on top.
Like I said. I enjoy vibe coding things. I’ve done a few. However I don’t go and pitch them as alternatives to well known OSS projects, because I know my vibe coding could never compare.
Again, I don’t really see the difference here. Whether the authors continue to maintain the project long or not has little to do with what tools were used to build the project. And calling anything where LLMs are used for development vibecoding is just silly to be honest. There’s a huge variation in quality of code both in hand written code and that where LLMs are used. What you should be looking at in both cases is how much usage project gets, how good the tests are, whether authors built useful things before, and so on.
If a project is useful then I really don’t care how it’s coded. Existing projects are in no way diminished by the fact that this project exists.
Correct, and again, I’m someone who uses AI, I’m not one of the ones who are purely against it. The definition what what I’ve both done and seen:
I do care how it’s coded because it shows how well it will be maintained into the future. If someone uses LLMs over months to build something it will probably be maintained. If someone vomited out all of that code in one vibecoded session, it’s very likely they’ll be bored and in a month it’ll be abandoned. That’s what I’m looking at, because tests can be automated now.
Maybe I’ll be wrong and in a month they’ll have committed hundreds of times and are trying to mature it. I have no evidence of that though, so there is no reason I’d risk trying it out.