Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

EVi, a Hard-Fork of Vim

codeberg.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–67 of 67 posts

Re: EVi, a Hard-Fork of Vim

#61

Post by opan »

Imustaskforhelp wrote: post #47
GaryBluto wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

From what I've read of Codeberg it's user base is a tad tetchy and has a tendency to make mountains out of molehills. It was more of a comment on Codeberg than the project itself.

Codeberg has always been like this for what its worth. One of the most starred projects on Codeberg is a wayland terminal called foot (Which I used to/use btw, highly recommended terminal) :] > It was more of a comment on Codeberg than the project itself. This is more so an observation of Centralization. Let me explain. Centralized platforms like Reddit/Twitter/Github usually exist. Fediverse solutions like Lemmy/Mas…

Codeberg has my favorite UI of the bunch as well. As a regular user rather than a programmer, I really appreciate how easy it is to find both Issues (I am a frequent bug reporter) and Releases near the top of the page. GitHub hides Releases on the side or bottom (mobile), and GitLab's UI is such a mess I don't even know where to start. I've often edited my URL to get to Issues or Releases on some git forges because it's easier than dealing with their UI.

Re: EVi, a Hard-Fork of Vim

#62

Post by wat10000 »

lemonwaterlime wrote: post #57
wat10000 wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They're already talking about pushing it back farther, trying to revert/rewrite every commit from users suspected of ever using LLMs. Practicality doesn't really enter into it, this is an ideologically driven project that insists on getting rid of the "taint." https://codeberg.org/NerdNextDoor/evi/issues/19

I understand it is an ideological project. My point is that given their intent, there are things they should do to make their case. They should provide the evidence in the README etc. If they are correct and things must be done, they aren’t providing the evidence. That’s not the same as saying there’s no evidence or reason to take this stance. Do you see the distinction I am making?

Are you talking about evidence that LLM contributions are harmful, or evidence that there are any? The former is unnecessary, as this is not an evangelism project, it's for people who already believe LLMs are bad. For the latter, I think the project is aimed at people who are already plugged into the issue, or suffers from the usual mistake of thinking everyone is plugged into a specific issue. In any case, it takes about five seconds to search for "claude" in the main vim repo's PRs and find that evidence.

Re: EVi, a Hard-Fork of Vim

#63

Post by lemonwaterlime »

wat10000 wrote: post #62
lemonwaterlime wrote: post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I understand it is an ideological project. My point is that given their intent, there are things they should do to make their case. They should provide the evidence in the README etc. If they are correct and things must be done, they aren’t providing the evidence. That’s not the same as saying there’s no evidence or reason to take this stance. Do you see the distinction I am making?

Are you talking about evidence that LLM contributions are harmful, or evidence that there are any? The former is unnecessary, as this is not an evangelism project, it's for people who already believe LLMs are bad. For the latter, I think the project is aimed at people who are already plugged into the issue, or suffers from the usual mistake of thinking everyone is plugged into a specific issue. In any case, it takes…

It’s about demonstrating via the diligence that you are a good steward of a fork. This is a requirement of any fork for it to take and be stable.

Re: EVi, a Hard-Fork of Vim

#64

Post by wat10000 »

lemonwaterlime wrote: post #63
wat10000 wrote: post #62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Are you talking about evidence that LLM contributions are harmful, or evidence that there are any? The former is unnecessary, as this is not an evangelism project, it's for people who already believe LLMs are bad. For the latter, I think the project is aimed at people who are already plugged into the issue, or suffers from the usual mistake of thinking everyone is plugged into a specific issue. In any case, it takes…

It’s about demonstrating via the diligence that you are a good steward of a fork. This is a requirement of any fork for it to take and be stable.

That’s the trouble with ideological projects. They tend to focus on the one thing and neglect the rest.

Re: EVi, a Hard-Fork of Vim

#65

Post by threatofrain »

zzzeek wrote: post #14
askl wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There's a bunch of commits that have "supported by AI claude." as well. Whatever that's supposed to mean.

the lesson here is dont put those comments into your commits. use the tools you want to write code and just use them. it's nobody else's business. if someone overuses AI (which is common) it's quite obvious anyway

It’s someone else's business when you want your works to have a relationship with the world. Or were you content with talking to nobody?

Re: EVi, a Hard-Fork of Vim

#66

Post by zzzeek »

threatofrain wrote: post #65
zzzeek wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

the lesson here is dont put those comments into your commits. use the tools you want to write code and just use them. it's nobody else's business. if someone overuses AI (which is common) it's quite obvious anyway

It’s someone else's business when you want your works to have a relationship with the world. Or were you content with talking to nobody?

im required to disclose AI use in my own OSS projects on github? no, I'm not

Re: EVi, a Hard-Fork of Vim

#67

Post by threatofrain »

zzzeek wrote: post #66
threatofrain wrote: post #65

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It’s someone else's business when you want your works to have a relationship with the world. Or were you content with talking to nobody?

im required to disclose AI use in my own OSS projects on github? no, I'm not

Whether it's someone else's business that you're using AI does not require you to do anything in particular. This is a discussion on the relevance of motivations.
Post reply on HN