At the risk of getting internet-assaulted I am one of the primary devs, feel free to ask me about it. To address some of the issues already raised:
- All the new “AI” (LLM) features are opt-in, meaning if you dont enable them you wont see them, literally. At all.
- All of them can also be run local-only, of course.
- There are a ton of other features as well.
- One of our devs has made use of Claude especially around database schema improvements, which is a particularly tricky thing to work on. I dont like AI, I wish I could go back to the world before it, but I cant. So at this point it is almost absurd to not use LLM tools to some degree in programming. AI slop or vibe-coding is to do so indiscriminately, and I hate that too. Believe me we get tons of PRs from people with basically no dev experience or abilities slinging up a Claude PR they dont understand… and we dont accept them. We expect the same from ourselves. We use it sparingly and very specifically, interrogate it aggressively and stand behind it after it’s merged. To somehow object to any / all use of it at this point either implies a) you dont do programming or b) you dont understand the nuances of how tools can be used in programming. Used properly, it’s no more offensive than using an IDE instead of a bare text editor, is that something you care about?
- Also, leaving Claude as a co-author I would argue seems more transparent, not doing so or not disclosing it in the PR seems like the shadier choice.
- The ethical concerns about LLMs, compute use etc are real, but I dont think one OSS project somehow needs to bear the entire weight of this societal problem.
Again, Im happy to discuss more, as long is its not the guy who opened the raving “issue” in our project.
Hey, dont believe me, Im just a random, but this guy seems like worth a listen: https://arstechnica.com/ai/2026/07/linus-torvalds-to-critics-of-ai-coding-in-linux-fork-it-or-just-walk-away/