lux 🦊ΘΔ"You should judge PRs based on code quality not the fact i used LLMs" okay but if a construction worker closes their eyes and starts flailing their arms while holding hammers and says "you should judge my skill based on the nails i hit" you rightfully move aside and stop them before they knock someone unconscious
nicole4fox@SharpLimefox since when did we stop caring about the outcome when its about getting stuff done? As long as the person can exain everything and its an actually good PR?
Joe Brockmeier@nicole4fox @SharpLimefox is it "about getting stuff done", solely, though?
It kind of reeks of entitlement to demand that somebody take the time to evaluate or accept something if they've set criteria against it.
To make a point with a silly example: if a project says "we won't accept any contributions created with Vim", then I'll accept that. End of story. It's not for me to dictate to the project what its rules are, even if I think it's a stupid rule.
Even if the project has literally no way of telling whether I used Vim, Emacs, nano, or something else -- I'll respect their rule and not submit things coded or written in Vim. Because, IMO, open source is not merely about "getting stuff done" -- it's about collaborating with people to build community. And you can't build community without respecting people's boundaries.
Yes, that means that some communities are choosing to exclude LLM-driven stuff and, by extension, contributors who only want to submit LLM-assisted contributions.
Surely, if LLMs are so awesome, those contributors can start their own projects that welcome LLM-assisted contributions and outpace the human-driven projects because they'll be "getting stuff done", right?
@jzb @SharpLimefox i dont mind andhering to rules set by the maintainers and its completely valid to exclude LLMs from ones project i just think it doesnt make sense when the PRs are actually good and high quality to exclude them as a maintainer.