We need stricter verifications / credentials behind GitHub accounts and PRs. And this we should have had already before AI.
How does that help? People gladly post slop PRs under their real names.
Changing how we develop Ladybird
51–60 of 602 posts
Re: Changing how we develop Ladybird
#52Earlier quoted context omitted.
The Linux approach is under pressure too. Maintainers are beginning to warn about too many contributions and too much churn to review it all.
I know is a naive question, but it's genuine! Is this the direct result of a monolithic kernel? And would moving more drivers out-of-tree mitigate this?
There are numerous advantages of microkernels over monoliths, but even if Linux were a microkernel it wouldn't necessarily change the review pressure that the above commenter is talking about, because you still have the same number of components (filesystem, networking, drivers, etc) to develop and review patches for (although you do have more well-defined interfaces between components, which eases security).
Re: Changing how we develop Ladybird
#53I feel like the project just died.
Maybe, or maybe not. But it will certainly kill the community they've built up, and squander a huge amount of goodwill. Why would anybody who's interested in supporting or using an independent browser (read: techies) choose one that nobody can contribute to? Not to mention how the sponsors might feel about this.
Re: Changing how we develop Ladybird
#54This is one way to rephrase "we don't want your AI slop, thanks.".
> Whether code was typed by hand is beside the point. What matters is who is responsible for it once it enters the browser. Ladybird is becoming a browser for real users. The people introducing changes to it must be the people who decide those changes belong in the project, and who will answer for the consequences. It probably accelerated the decision, but I don't think that's all of it. I think they're moving in the…
It's still open source, but not open for public contributions. That's pretty much how it was before the advent of these forges.
Re: Changing how we develop Ladybird
#55Wasn't the entire goal of Ladybird to have an open and independent browser engine? Making it effectively closed to contributions makes it.. Not independent anymore. It's now dependent, on few people who work on it, just like any other closed-source or corporate-controlled browser.
[deleted]
Re: Changing how we develop Ladybird
#56I can understand where they come from. If most of the pull-requests were AI-coded, well, the maintainers are equally capable of prompting Claude Code themselves. I think the whole game of software engineering, open source or not, has completely changed. A lump of code doesn't mean or imply the same thing as it did 2 years ago.
The code just isn’t the main effort of work anymore. Anyone can generate the implementation, so it makes more sense than ever to instead hammer out the what, why, and how that underlies any code change.
I see all projects moving this direction. Makes more sense to hash out a plan together.
Re: Changing how we develop Ladybird
#57This is one way to rephrase "we don't want your AI slop, thanks.".
AI contributions are only a part of the issue. Another part is where a contributor decides they want a specific feature and contributes it but then disappears off into the sunset when it comes to needing maintenance later.
Re: Changing how we develop Ladybird
#58I can understand where they come from. If most of the pull-requests were AI-coded, well, the maintainers are equally capable of prompting Claude Code themselves. I think the whole game of software engineering, open source or not, has completely changed. A lump of code doesn't mean or imply the same thing as it did 2 years ago.
yeah but they could get free token usage from the community
Re: Changing how we develop Ladybird
#59This rather feels like it's completely stepping away from the thing that made the community around Serenity and Ladybird so good.
I lost all trust in the project since the LLM rewrite. This new step is another red flag to me.
Re: Changing how we develop Ladybird
#60I truly understand why this step was taken, but it is still sad to see the death of open source or rather open contribution. Every project that turns away from open contributions is a project lost to the whims and fuckery of AI Bros.
What I realy want to know how sustainable a model like this is. How does one find new maintainers when old ones leave. When you cannot contribute anymore.