3 ms·

So, has anyone actually checked if it's just an issue with 3.4.3? Going to back to 3.4.1 skips 3.4.2 which features many contributions that aren't either by An

So, has anyone actually checked if it's just an issue with 3.4.3? Going to back to 3.4.1 skips 3.4.2 which features many contributions that aren't either by Andrew or Claude.

blurbleblurble 5mo ago
They have not
omgtehlion 5mo ago
Seems like 3.4.2 was already vibe-maintained: https://github.com/RsyncProject/rsync/commits/v3.4.2 https://github.com/RsyncProject/rsync/commits/v3.4.2
- jasonvorhe 5mo ago
  So? May main point is: Which commits actually broke the functionality? Going from 3.4.3 to 3.4.2 to test should be easy for anyone affected and would have been more helpful than this rant. I'm not defending bad slop commits, especially for such a long running project but the tribal Fediverse outrage whenever LLMs are involved is often just lazy and uninformed. To quote this PR: https://github.com/RsyncProject/rsync/issues/928 https://github.com/RsyncProject/rsync/issues/928 > NOTE: This also affects backported rsync versions when they're used on the Receiver: > Debian: 3.4.1+ds1-5+deb13u3 / 3.2.7-1+deb12u5 / 3.2.3-4+deb11u3 > Ubuntu: 3.2.7-1ubuntu1.4
  - fooker 5mo ago
    Figuring out which commit broke what functionality is not something you can expect users to do.
    - cbarnes99 5mo ago
      If you're willing to build from source it's not particularly difficult with git bisect
    - Lerc 5mo ago
      No, but that's probably a required skill to have before you initiate claims as to what the cause of the loss of functionality was.
- kelnos 5mo ago
  It's pretty shitty to accuse someone of vibe-coding without having any idea what their LLM-assisted development process is. Let's do better, please.