Linux
Welcome to c/linux!
Welcome to our thriving Linux community! Whether you're a seasoned Linux enthusiast or just starting your journey, we're excited to have you here. Explore, learn, and collaborate with like-minded individuals who share a passion for open-source software and the endless possibilities it offers. Together, let's dive into the world of Linux and embrace the power of freedom, customization, and innovation. Enjoy your stay and feel free to join the vibrant discussions that await you!
Rules:
-
Stay on topic: Posts and discussions should be related to Linux, open source software, and related technologies.
-
Be respectful: Treat fellow community members with respect and courtesy.
-
Quality over quantity: Share informative and thought-provoking content.
-
No spam or self-promotion: Avoid excessive self-promotion or spamming.
-
No NSFW adult content
-
Follow general lemmy guidelines.
view the rest of the comments
A maintainer. Apparently went into a hissy fit because people pointed out to him that he broke the rules. That said, the critics probably weren't very nice to him either.
Ah, Linux drama.
BTW, the rules sound sensible to me:
Esp. this part: "contributions must (...) be understood by the contributor."
I'm in a smaller community that sees a lot of AI-supported app development recently and while the outcome can occasionally be good, I'm not sure it's worth taking those few good apples with the flood of vibe coded projects, and their "developers" that tend to get very defensive when simply asked about things.
Not saying this is the case here though.
On the rules, citing hperrin:
Great that people are working on that. And adopting it.
I think establishing new rules and boundaries in a new territory will never happen entirely without conflict. Nice if people still behave like gentlemen.
why did you omit the important part of that quote
Probably because it isn't actually the important part. And also because he did, in fact, quote it in full before repeating the part he found important.
yeah... but in my opinion it is the important part... imo it is okay to use an llm to get a reference implementation and then you refactor it into aworking piece that you understand and comment afterwards
Okay, the "must be understood" is the important part when discussing what's good about the rule, and the "must originate from" is the important part when discussing what's problematic about the rule.