[Hendrikto]

Did he ask for help in churning all the code for no reason? Rsync was complete software. It does not need features, it needs stability and merely maintenance.

If the author used AI for small, well-reviewed maintenance changes, that would be okay. But instead he is making large and sweeping changes that are entirely uncalled for and cause breakage.

If the maintainer is overworked, that is even more reason not to do this.

[throwaway7356]

> Rsync was complete software.

It was (and is) not: rsync has over 300 open issues with bugs and feature requests.

[Hendrikto]

1. Some of those recent bugs were caused by unnecessary vibe-coded changes.

2. Of course bugs should be fixed. I even say so in the comment you replied to. You are attacking a strawman.

3. People will always make feature requests. Some want rsync to be able to make a sandwich. That is not really in-scope for the project though.

I think the GNU coreutils are doing this largely right. New features are almost never added. ls, for example, is pretty much complete, and too foundational to mess around with. If you need fancy new features, use something like eza.

[throwaway7356]

> Some of those recent bugs were caused by unnecessary vibe-coded changes.

If you think that fixing security issues is "unnecessary changes", maybe.

Though maybe security is not "in-scope" for you?

> That is not really in-scope for the project though.

Why do you decide what is in scope for the rsync project and what not?

Apparently the maintainer disagrees and also wants to fix existing security issues.

[Hendrikto]

> > People will [make] requests [that] rsync [should be able] to make a sandwich. That is not really in-scope for the project though.

> Why do you decide what is in scope for the rsync project and what not?

If you are arguing for making sandwiches being in scope for rsync, you proved that you are just a troll. We have reached the end of reasonable discussion.

[TheDong]

Do you have any links to commits or changes that you think are "uncalled for"? Like, you say "he is making large and sweeping changes that are entirely uncalled for and cause breakage", so surely you have some examples?

As far as I can tell, most of the AI-assisted changes were security fixes and test-suite related, and I'm sure you can agree that both of those are normal maintenance.

[Hendrikto]

Take a look at the commit graph. Activity is at an all-time high by far, which it absolutely should not be.

As an example, the entire test suite was recently vibe-replaced. An essential component for reliability and stability. And you can already see the results in the decreased stability and increased defect count.

[simianwords]

False. These were fixing the vulnerabilities which are at all time high due to related reasons.

[Sacho]

If Rsync is complete software, why aren't you pinning the version and avoiding any problems with updates?

Perhaps there's people that don't consider it complete software; they can bear the burden of the new releases while you stay on the old and complete one. This has been normal software release and use practice for decades. Whole Linux distributions are built around different philosophies on software releases.

And yet you're making an argument as if this is something novel...

[brabel]

What the hell why are you thinking you decide anything?? The man has his project and can do whatever he wants with it. Read the license.

[bakugo]

Yes, he is free to do whatever he wants with it. And others are also free to say that what he's doing is bad and is causing them problems when trying to use this well established software that is known for being stable and reliable.

[baobabKoodaa]

Freedom of speech goes both ways, not just the way you like.