|
|
|
|
|
|
by cobertos
15 days ago
|
|
|
> Why wouldn't it be except question begging priors assuming it couldn't be? A multitude of reasons? A change in maintainer. A change in the mental state of a maintainer. A sudden focus by the community on a given undesirable behavior. Someone else here suggested use of Claude AI before it was disclosured. The framing implies that it was human-produced coding error, but my point is it could be _any other human error_ or even just some odd benign human behavior (a stampede of bug submitters), affecting the data. Which does not lead to the conclusion that AI code > human code. Not looking at these potentials is so unsatisfying. > My original metrics which didn't filter out feature requests... It still feels like a lot of weight of the phrase "If that doesn't look like a red flag to you, you'd be right." hinges on the fact that one of the versions has 0 bugs and it really killed the weight of that statement for me, because the oddity of there being 0 bugs just wasn't explained. --- Could you please post the duckdb file that has the raw bug -> severity + version mapping to the GitHub repo? I have a desire to dig into this myself |
|
|