3 ms·
It’s not like they are discriminating on someone’s race or religion. If they don’t want a major vibe coded surface, do they even have to defend that? It’s part
by getcrunk 4mo ago
It’s not like they are discriminating on someone’s race or religion. If they don’t want a major vibe coded surface, do they even have to defend that? It’s part their “artistic” license as developers.
Or did we forget software inherently is opinionated
- karel-3d 4mo agoexactly... and it's not like it's hard to fork and just raise the minimum version. It will probably be just one number somewhere (I haven't actually looked.) if it works, it will keep working. they just don't want to support and maintain it and solve issues.
- dbalatero 4mo agoGiven some posters on the GitHub issue, I get the sense some people feel their religion is being violated.
- BoorishBears 4mo agoYou don't even have to leave this site: when the original Bun rewrite posts were made, an incredible number of comments were focused, not on Bun, but on Jarred, who I'm assured is a complete rockstar and would never harm Bun. Unfortunately, his followers don't realize that something like a batteries-included runtime is a huge commitment to build on top of, and governance you can trust matters as much, if not more, than the lines of code. The way this has been handled is just baffling. A Rust rewrite is supposed to be a freebie for hype, and even an AI rewrite could have been interesting if approached more scientifically and transparently... but instead the opposite of that happened.
- deleted 4mo ago[deleted]
- gkfasdfasdf 4mo agoYes, it’s actually similar to discriminating based on race or religion, in the sense that it’s an arbitrary, meaningless criterion to discriminate on. If the Rust Bun port is better in every measurable way — passes all tests, has the same performance or better, and fixes existing bugs — then who cares what language it’s written in or how it was implemented? The point is that it’s higher quality. If you don’t trust the Bun team when they release a Rust version and give it their stamp of approval, why did you trust them when they released the Zig version two weeks ago? It makes no logical sense, and it makes the yt-dlp devs look foolish.
- strus 4mo ago> If you don’t trust the Bun team when they release a Rust version and give it their stamp of approval, why did you trust them when they released the Zig version two weeks ago? I think you cannot make this comparison because Rust version wasn’t in fact written by the Bun team. It wasn’t even read by them.
- solenoid0937 4mo ago[flagged]
- wiseowise 4mo agoAnyone who isn’t supporting using runtime rewritten by an LLM is obviously “doesn’t get it” and a luddite.
- KingMob 4mo agoBut in this case, the yt-dlp maintainers didn't actually evaluate the rewrite yet, they just declared they wouldn't support it, sight unseen. Not really an argument on its merits.
- gibber878 4mo ago[flagged]
- wiseowise 4mo agoOSS is not a testing ground for rewrites made by hyperscalers. Bun is free to fork yt-dlp and prove it is stable enough.
- jabavagauha 4mo agoThat’s the fun part no one has evaluated the rewrite yet! Not even the bun team! Claude says it’s all good though so what could go wrong
- johneth 4mo ago
- root_axis 4mo agoBased on the comments I think a lot of people assume the headline pertains to Bun itself.
- deadbabe 4mo agoThis stuff brings bad vibes.
- insanitybit 4mo agoI don't think they have to defend it, but I don't think there's any issue questioning the validity of the approach.
- LtWorf 4mo agoIf you don't like a decision don't harass, fork.