I’m baffled by this.

What business have projects mandating the tool I use for my contributions? I’m responsible of the quality of what I send and should be the sole arbiter of if I want to clean generated code or not. This person is basically calling all their potential contributors too stupid to reasonably use some class of tools. That’s downright insulting.

I have lost all the good will I had for Servo.

Aren’t you playing into the very drama that you are criticizing?

Is it disappointing that drama is an important reason people contribute to Servo?

While I agree with your point about being responsible for the quality of the code you send, please remember that...

> This post is my personal opinion, not necessarily representative of Servo or my colleagues at Igalia.

...so I don't believe it's fair to say that you lost all the good will you had for Servo based on just this article.

How can they tell if you submit a patch that you produced with the help of AI though? They mentioned they found a bug in an AI-assisted patch. But an actual skilled programmer can easily produce code with the help of AI that doesn't have any bugs in it.

Whenever i open HN, there's a pro-A"I" post which makes me almost question if intellectual labor will be useful in a few years.

Yet when i try to use these tools, they fall short. They can probably be useful for generating half broken prototypes quickly because speed is more important that quality. But for real code, especially long term, they just never seem to end up breaking even.

This post somewhat restored my confidence in the world's sanity. There are still people who care about quality and who are willing to call bullshit bullshit.

EDIT: The most important part is that he links to tons of examples from other people. There's clearly a sizeable group of people who are not being heard often enough.