[ChiefTinkeer]

Provided he reviewed it and checked the readme is telling the users what it needs to tell them - what's the issue? I've found documentation to be one of the better tasks AI can perform and see no reason why not to use it provided a human is in the loop.

[docheinestages]

Just looking at the diagrams in the README, the broken ASCII suggests to me it either wasn't looked at or the author didn't care.

[Milner08]

I agree, but its tricky as many people seem to not read it and I have seen AI documentation that is so verbose and dense that its almost as useless as not having it. Its a fine line but so long as the AI documentation is reviewed and reasonable then I see no issue.

[vanillameow]

1. In reality most people simply do not do this, and frankly it's exhausting to be expected to always assume goodwill in a setting that is full of pure vanity.

2. There's a difference between technical documentation, which AI can be quite decent at, and product marketing. A README is usually about 20/80, maybe 50/50 for large FOSS projects. You can have the AI write the sections on how to install the thing for all I care, but as soon as AI is telling me why I should use it, you've lost me. Signals a complete lack of interest in your own product.

[no_shadowban_3]

It's a strong signal of low quality.

The question is: "Should I spend my time engaging with this project?"

The AI-forward presentation says: "Absolutely not."