vim, harfbuzz, who's next? people ask in shock, but...

i think, fundamentally, the reason Claude and Codex are becoming part of crucial FOSS projects is the same reason xz almost became the entry point for mass-scale server hacking a few years ago. we've decided to make billion dollar industries rely on burned out, lonely individual developers who never found a way to get paid for their labor. we never managed to solve that problem.

these burned out, lonely devs see a tool that spits out the boring part of their work in a more or less functional manner if you squint, and it "only" (*) costs "$200" (**) a month. i can imagine why most people take it. heck, i won't deny that i am tempted myself, but my convictions remain too strong.

i've also seen some say that these people should step down and make way for new developers. who, exactly? i know how many months it took me to find a maintainer for one of the more popular Minecraft mods, and that's a position with both far more takers and far less responsibility on either side.

i think that a lot of what's going to happen to software in the next few years is the consequence of long term systemic issues. the introduction of LLM tools to the equation is merely an illuminant and accelerant

@asie indeed, thank you for putting this into words.
looking at the current vim maintainers, they have resorted to LLM tools exactly because of this. to give a concrete example, Christian Brabant is about to be burned out and doesn't have any free time (source). the same is true of other maintainers.

there is a serious problem with how open-source development is funded and how maintainers are treated. FOSS developers must be properly supported for their work, and not just by benevolent tech companies that allow developers to work on FOSS projects on company time or with ephemeral grants (NLnet, GSoC, …).

maybe there should be some sort of regulations around the supply chain and software used by corporations to require them to properly support FOSS developers of libraries they use. but how could this work in practice, as short of dual-licensing, there are no provisions in most FOSS licenses that require payment for corporations?

Add setrepeat() and getrepeat() functions for dot command control by Shougo · Pull Request #19413 · vim/vim

Summary Add setrepeat() and getrepeat() functions to allow scripts to programmatically control the dot (.) repeat command. This enables plugins to: Save and restore the repeat command Make custom ...

GitHub