I answered earlier, that I use AI and this is just a commit skill for an agent.

Judging code quality by use of LLM in a documentation and commit messages is weird.

While I write all of my code myself and I’m against vibe coding etc., there is one place where I let a LLM write for me: readmes, commit messages and Javadoc comments.

I know how to write code but at the same time I’m shit at both my native language and even more so at English. So I let Language Models write natural language texts for me and just fix them when necessary. My documentation is more clear, grammatically correct and more detailed than in any of my previous projects, and I can focus on writing code.

And I wouldn’t say “No one does that in a project they’re building for themselves”. I do that for projects that only I will ever see, and OP shared his project with others, so it’s great that he included a clear documentation

No one does that in a project they’re building for themselves.

Speak for yourself, I always did that and I found it easier with LLMs nowadays.

I hate most AI shite with a passion but when it helps my colleagues write commits which are more than “add stuff”, “fix some things” I’m fine with it.

I rarely use AI to generate code, usually only when I need a starting point. It’s much easier to unfuck AI code than to stare blankly at a screen for an hour. I’d never commit code I don’t fully understand or have read to the last byte.

I hope OP is doing the same. LLMs fail at 90% of coding tasks for me but for the other 10% (mostly writing tests, readmes, boilerplate) it’s really OK for productivity.

Ethics of LLMs aside, if you use them for exactly what they’re built for – being a supercharged glorified autocomplete – they’re cool. As soon as you try to use them for something else like “autocompletion from zero” aka “creativity”, they fail spectacularly.

.

Partially agree, but I do know how to code and use it as a tool.

You can see that I use some of metrics, like test coverage, estimates and so on to prove its validation as potentially serious project, that will grow from a pet one.

It’s not realistic to expect no AI assistance in coding in 2026.

It’s also not a stand-in for a human. There’s a huge field of gray where it’s unclear how much of it was fully vibe coded vs how much is carefully hand reviewed and/or written.

I’ve been a professional developer for decades and I’ve done both. Obviously I’ve hand coded stuff for many years. The fully vibe coded stuff is personal, to test and learn the capabilities of the tech. My professional stuff I watch much more closely, and I’m much more targeted in what I’m having the AI do.

That said, if I were gonna use this I’d actually review the code. I’m not recommending this guy’s stuff, but you can’t rule it out on the basis of ai assistance alone.

Why?

It makes sense to try to give users an idea of how robust a project is, but the exact details of the tools involved in its creation rarely add much to that. It gets a little weird with LLMs because they allow someone with no programming skill to create software that appears to work, which ought to be disclosed; “I don’t know what I’m doing and I asked a robot to make this” does indicate unreliable code. A skilled developer having an LLM fill in some extra test cases, on the other hand can only make the project more robust.

because I don’t know jackshit about coding and I am not gonna pretend I do.

But if OP does know and apply that knowledge to what they are doing, it’s not the same thing and doesn’t make sense to have the same disclaimer.

@militaryintelligence @terraincognita

They are tools like any other, it's how you use them that matters.

Imagine you are on the ground under your car and need a different tool. You ask for it and somebody hands it to you. That person is young and inexperienced. It is up to You to check if it’s the right tool, and if not pass it back (and in this example tell the person about the error and help them correct it).

And sure, You can always crawl out and get the tool yourself and sometimes that is the only option and in coding terms in my opinion best practice. But you can be faster with your helper. Use it appropriately and see how it affects your work. And that’s the point, your work. Don’t pass responsibility or thought off to AI.

Because it’s able to write boilerplate faster than a human. And because it’s able to perform refactorings that are not possible with IDEs or regex due to their lack of structure. Also because you can ask it to review your files and it does find bugs that would otherwise be missed at first. There’s a huge difference between vibe-coded slop and using the tools available to you effectively.

I use it all the time as a kind of brainstorming tool.

“I want to do X (and details), can you tell me what tools or algorithms are available to me? List their pros and cons and give me some comparison”

Or on a somewhat recent project of mine, I has to effectively stub an entire library (but didn’t have to be done well), so I just told AI “take this page (the docs) and generate empty function stubs from it”. It doesn’t need to be high quality since it doesn’t run, it’s just to fool the dotnet engine.

I also tend to ask AI to add logging to some functions, since it’s annoying to do and impossible to mess up.

I agree, though there is a difference in case you rovided and mine. It is a human-directed work. Thousands of libraries, Kubernetes, Kubernetes still live and license is valid.

Yes, I’m aware of those apps. They’re great local-first mobile trackers. Ovumcy explores a slightly different approach - a self-hosted web app that can run on infrastructure you control and be accessed from multiple devices.

Well, not stealing, being inspired)

Appreciate that!

Yup. You really don’t want the maga cult monitoring your cycle. If you stopped menstruating for a bit you must be pregnant. Where is the baby? Omg you murdered the baby by taking Tylenol!

I see that we face it all over the world now.

No-no, you run your VPS and deploy it there. So you define your storage, it can be homeVPS

No, we didn’t ship it without security hardening.

We already hardened the main sensitive parts:

sealed auth/recovery/reset/flash cookies no auth or recovery secrets in URLs or JSON POST + CSRF logout basic browser security headers CodeQL, gosec, Trivy, and SBOM in CI What’s still missing is a strict CSP. That’s not a one-line switch here because the current frontend still needs some refactoring first.

Worth to say, that this is an ongoing development, this is not even version 1, v 0.3.1

What a douchebag