5 ms·

For those commenting, I suggest you read the post linked by the rsync author: https://medium.com/@tridge60/rsync-and-outrage-d9849599e5a0 https://medium.com/@t

For those commenting, I suggest you read the post linked by the rsync author: https://medium.com/@tridge60/rsync-and-outrage-d9849599e5a0 https://medium.com/@tridge60/rsync-and-outrage-d9849599e5a0 (Disclosure: while I haven't talked with him in years, Tridge was my colleague and mentor for many years. I feel it is worth considering his view before joining a crusade)

nullc 3mo ago
I think that's an extremely well done response on his part.
- deleted 3mo ago
  [deleted]
matheusmoreira 3mo ago
This should be the top comment. I think it's pretty sad that he even had to write it. Quite a lot of judgement from people who aren't paying his bills.
- dnnddidiej 3mo ago
  The title at least sounds less like judgement and more analysis and more about AI assistance (and claude in particular) than rsync. Maybe I am too used to postmortems!
  - el_io 3mo ago
    I think they're talking about the whole twitter and github issue things.
- Laurel1234 3mo ago
  Yeah a big reason you see so much pushback on clanker slop is that it's having (and there was certainly the expectation of it having) a negative impact on the ability of plenty of people to pay their bills.
  - varispeed 3mo ago
    also people calling all AI is shite, might not have used top tier models. They put $20, tried Sonnet, got sloppy code and called it a day.
  - matheusmoreira 3mo ago
    Nice to know we've got slurs for LLMs and their users now. Very nice.
    - Laurel1234 3mo ago
      It's not a slur, clankers ain't people.
      - rickydroll 3mo ago
        If corporations can be people, there is no reason why AI can't be considered a person.
        noddybear 3mo ago
        Nobody human considers a corporation to be a person. It is merely a legal expedient.
        rickydroll 3mo ago
        I used to think that until I did a little digging into it. Specifically, corporations are considered legal persons because they are separate legal entities, thereby creating a wall between your personal affairs and your business. It protects your personal assets from any liabilities, debts, or lawsuits. Also, since it's a separate entity, its lifetime is not tied to the owner. So if the owner dies, their shares are inherited by somebody else, and the company keeps operating. It helps in raising money for business operations. A corporation raises capital by issuing and selling shares of stock. However, if a physical person did that, I think it would be called indentured servitude.
jorvi 3mo ago
> I thought it would be a good idea to do the core structure for the new test suite in public on master first though given all the rage that has generated maybe that was a bad idea. I don't entirely understand what this is saying. People wouldn't have been outraged if only the tests had been updated and/or he pushed solely on master - but he pushed breaking changes onto the release branch(es) too. Breaking workflows that have worked for years is a prime way to get people irate, and then seeing "Claude" in the commits just pours gasoline onto the fire.
- RustyRussell 3mo ago
  It seems that wasn't the Claude part, though I haven't seen a full analysis of exactly what broke. I also only saw one report: are there multiple, or do you just perceive that? Rsync has many options: I can totally believe that fixing a bug in one place broke someone's usage, to be fair.
- jpalomaki 3mo ago
  "yes, there were regressions in some use cases of rsync in the 3.4.3 release. I quite deliberately tried to err on the side of fixing security issues for that release, and there were some valid (but unusual) use cases that got caught up in the changes"
guilhas 3mo ago
> Now if any of the people posting the rage stuff want to actually review any of the code I’ve published and make constructive criticisms then that would be great! When you quickly churn more lines of code in a few days than you changed in months, and then release them as a normal, not sure you're expecting "constructive criticism" Also if I suspect the project is just slopping high amount of code without proper thought, I probably won't invest my time into reading those changes
advael 3mo ago
I get that there's a lot of loud nonsense flying around about AI, both positive and negative, and I echo the sentiment that people should have some damn perspective when talking to FOSS maintainers, but I think writing a bunch of AI-assisted code that causes regressions and then responding to that by throwing out a strawman about how critics (with PhDs no less!) are telling him these things can't do anything at all and can't possibly understand how literally everything has fundamentally changed in the last few months sounds way more like a guy who has a motivated (and understandable - he's retired ffs) reason to... a little bit buy into the hype I think he makes a lot of good points here, but also think that kind of statement is unlikely to assuage the real concerns of people using the software. I think people are more likely to fork rsync now rather than rely on a more diverged earlier alternative implementation though

nullc 3mo ago

I think that's an extremely well done response on his part.

deleted 3mo ago
[deleted]

matheusmoreira 3mo ago

This should be the top comment. I think it's pretty sad that he even had to write it. Quite a lot of judgement from people who aren't paying his bills.

dnnddidiej 3mo ago
The title at least sounds less like judgement and more analysis and more about AI assistance (and claude in particular) than rsync. Maybe I am too used to postmortems!
- el_io 3mo ago
  I think they're talking about the whole twitter and github issue things.
Laurel1234 3mo ago
Yeah a big reason you see so much pushback on clanker slop is that it's having (and there was certainly the expectation of it having) a negative impact on the ability of plenty of people to pay their bills.
- varispeed 3mo ago
  also people calling all AI is shite, might not have used top tier models. They put $20, tried Sonnet, got sloppy code and called it a day.
- matheusmoreira 3mo ago
  Nice to know we've got slurs for LLMs and their users now. Very nice.
  - Laurel1234 3mo ago
    It's not a slur, clankers ain't people.
    - rickydroll 3mo ago
      If corporations can be people, there is no reason why AI can't be considered a person.
      - noddybear 3mo ago
        Nobody human considers a corporation to be a person. It is merely a legal expedient.
        rickydroll 3mo ago
        I used to think that until I did a little digging into it. Specifically, corporations are considered legal persons because they are separate legal entities, thereby creating a wall between your personal affairs and your business. It protects your personal assets from any liabilities, debts, or lawsuits. Also, since it's a separate entity, its lifetime is not tied to the owner. So if the owner dies, their shares are inherited by somebody else, and the company keeps operating. It helps in raising money for business operations. A corporation raises capital by issuing and selling shares of stock. However, if a physical person did that, I think it would be called indentured servitude.

jorvi 3mo ago

> I thought it would be a good idea to do the core structure for the new test suite in public on master first though given all the rage that has generated maybe that was a bad idea. I don't entirely understand what this is saying. People wouldn't have been outraged if only the tests had been updated and/or he pushed solely on master - but he pushed breaking changes onto the release branch(es) too. Breaking workflows that have worked for years is a prime way to get people irate, and then seeing "Claude" in the commits just pours gasoline onto the fire.

RustyRussell 3mo ago
It seems that wasn't the Claude part, though I haven't seen a full analysis of exactly what broke. I also only saw one report: are there multiple, or do you just perceive that? Rsync has many options: I can totally believe that fixing a bug in one place broke someone's usage, to be fair.
jpalomaki 3mo ago
"yes, there were regressions in some use cases of rsync in the 3.4.3 release. I quite deliberately tried to err on the side of fixing security issues for that release, and there were some valid (but unusual) use cases that got caught up in the changes"

guilhas 3mo ago

> Now if any of the people posting the rage stuff want to actually review any of the code I’ve published and make constructive criticisms then that would be great! When you quickly churn more lines of code in a few days than you changed in months, and then release them as a normal, not sure you're expecting "constructive criticism" Also if I suspect the project is just slopping high amount of code without proper thought, I probably won't invest my time into reading those changes

advael 3mo ago

I get that there's a lot of loud nonsense flying around about AI, both positive and negative, and I echo the sentiment that people should have some damn perspective when talking to FOSS maintainers, but I think writing a bunch of AI-assisted code that causes regressions and then responding to that by throwing out a strawman about how critics (with PhDs no less!) are telling him these things can't do anything at all and can't possibly understand how literally everything has fundamentally changed in the last few months sounds way more like a guy who has a motivated (and understandable - he's retired ffs) reason to... a little bit buy into the hype I think he makes a lot of good points here, but also think that kind of statement is unlikely to assuage the real concerns of people using the software. I think people are more likely to fork rsync now rather than rely on a more diverged earlier alternative implementation though