• grue@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 month ago

    They can’t fork it now because the fact that the AI commits aren’t labeled as such means there’s no way to tell which need to be removed.

    • Mechanism@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 month ago

      They can’t fork it now because the fact that the AI commits aren’t labeled as such means there’s no way to tell which need to be removed.

      So… they can’t do that because they can’t tell the difference between the human code and the AI’s code? So that means that either A. The human code is also slop or B. The AI’s code is on par with the human’s code. This comment really proves that this aversion to AI is purely ideological.

      • hperrin@lemmy.caOP
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 month ago

        Based on the thread I originally linked, and the dev’s response, with regard to Lutris, I think the answer is A.

        • CrypticCoffee@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          1 month ago

          But there was attribution, so you can easily check out commit before attribution was removed, use git blame on class attribution to see when it started, and fork before it.

          • hperrin@lemmy.caOP
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            1 month ago

            What I’m saying is it’s probably not worth forking Lutris because it’s bad code. It would be better to just switch to a better alternative.

            • CrypticCoffee@lemmy.ml
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              1 month ago

              Like?

              Heroic doesn’t work in all cases. I have to have both installed to use my library.

              I’ve had many issues with other software and ended up having to use Lutris.

              Lutris may have bad code, but functionally mature is generally what succeeds. Sexy code that doesn’t work exists on a handful of computers only.

              There is a reason we are talking about it. Its the most popular Linux launcher. Wishing that wasn’t true doesn’t change the fact it is.

      • grue@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 month ago

        Being able to see a difference in code quality is one thing; being able to prove who wrote the code for purposes like license compliance is another.