Relevant since we started outright rejecting agent-made PRs in awesome-selfhosted [1] and issuing bans for it. Some PRs made in good faith could probably get caught in the net, but it’s currently the only decent tradeoff we could make to absorb the massive influx of (bad) contributions. >99.9% of them are invalid for other reasons anyway. Maybe a good solution will emerge over time.
Yep. https://lemmy.world/post/46066942/23416719 Basic setup, works for me


I wish more people understood this.
Do I use LLMs to write software for my personal use? Sure. I still try to build it in an “incremental” way the same way I would write software manually so I don’t get 10k SLOC written in a week, but at some point, even reviewing 100 LOC changes takes time, so I just take a cursory look at the diff, yolo-merge-and-run to test it. It’s not critical. This is fine. I’m just exploring the problem domain and solutions.
But would I go as far as sharing it, making a damn git repo and advertising it on Lemmy? Fuck no. This is unreliable, inscrutable slopware tailored for my own use. Anyone with a local LLM or a 20 euro claude/codex/z.ai subscription can do the same thing in a few minutes of work a day.
A single 10-line patch/contribution to a human-written project, with contributors who understand the code, or even a well-curated comment in a bug tracker that helps devs debug an issue or clearly expresses a need, has more value for the community than 50 vibe-coded projects.
Have you considered filing feature requests for these on existing, well-maintained projects?
Yes, even writing a proper issue report probably entails more work and brainstorming than prompting your way to a shitty solution. No offense meant, I do it as well. I know using a LLM and pumping out a working solution to a complex problem in a week gives a feeling of euphoria and power; this wouldn’t have been possible at all a few years ago. But there is absolutely no value in proactively sharing and advertising it.
I appreciate OP being transparent about it though.