Post

daniel r(ooooooh) in nyc 🇺🇸
@danielroe.dev

I would far rather have someone try to fix something at worst case, it's a bug report at best, it's the gateway to someone becoming a valued contributor! (and the disclaimer signals that the person isn't trying to impress - humility is very important in oss!)

Doug Parker
@develwithoutacause.dwac.dev

I'm not sure I feel the same way. I can appreciate the honesty, but if it's "blindly authored" by Claude with no human understanding or validation of what it did, then I'm not sure this would provide enough value to be worth taking a reviewer's time on a (presumably unfamiliar) OSS project.

Doug Parker
@develwithoutacause.dwac.dev

Maybe the author is just speaking with less confidence than they actually have and I certainly wouldn't expect any external contributor to be intimately familiar with project internals.

0 reposts0 likes

Doug Parker
@develwithoutacause.dwac.dev

But I would expect the author to at least have a surface-level understanding of the code they generated and a reasonable belief that it solves the problem they intend to solve. It's not the maintainer's job to critique a contributor's AI. The user is always reviewer no. 1 of their AI tool outputs.