Seems like he’s been pushed into using LLMs as a way to cope with the deluge of LLM-generated security reports.

  • Phoenixz@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    68
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    22 hours ago

    Repost of my reply elsewhere:

    This guy is already retired, he wants to spend his days sailing and here we are bitching about rsync not being good enough while we all use if for free

    Most of us won’t be able to help code, fine.

    But most of us could help with translations

    Many of us could help with documentation

    Some of us could contribute regularly with small financial donations

    Some of us might have enough knowledge and expertise and experience to help code

    Others could come up with other tasks that could be done.

    The point is: rsync need more resources. Either we get him more resources or we STFU about the retired dev using AI. We can’t have it both ways.

    • Zos_Kia@jlai.lu
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      8
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      10 hours ago

      This whole debacle is making me extremely black pilled about open software in general. Just like cheap computing has died in recent years, I suspect non corporate free software is about to meet the same end to the acclaim of people who think they’re doing a good thing for the world.

    • ExLisper@lemmy.curiana.net
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      28
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      16 hours ago

      I think it’s unreasonable to complain that the guy is not working enough for free.

      I think it’s reasonable to alert people that rsync is not being properly maintained anymore and to seek alternatives.

      I would prefer the maintainer to announce publicly that he can’t maintain the project anymore and is looking for help/someone to take over instead of breaking the project silently.

      • Zos_Kia@jlai.lu
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        10
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        11 hours ago

        But where will the maintainers for these alternatives come from, when barely anybody has stepped up in the 30 years of rsync’s existence? Your comment implies that tridge didn’t call for help before, which is far from the truth.

        This is thankless maintenance on critical software, not some *-arr toy project for hobbyist self-hosters.

        • supersquirrel@sopuli.xyz
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          7 hours ago

          But where will the maintainers for these alternatives come from, when barely anybody has stepped up in the 30 years of rsync’s existence?

          Universal Healthcare would increase the pool of willing developers by an order of magnitude here.

          • fruitcantfly@programming.dev
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            6 hours ago

            Universal Healthcare would increase the pool of willing developers by an order of magnitude here.

            I’m not so sure. The problem is not a lack of developers. The problem is a lack of developers interested in working on rsync, or on any other specific project you can name. Most developers would rather work on their own projects.

            I would also question whether or not universal healthcare (though unquestionably a good thing) would actually result in such an increase in available developers. The following study looked at the geographical distribution of OSS developers in 2021, via Github contributions, and found that the US had a similar number of OSS developers per capita compared to similar countries that do have universal healthcare (see table 2):

            https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0040162522000105

            • supersquirrel@sopuli.xyz
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              3
              ·
              6 hours ago

              Github and the whole culture that it came out of it used to (it feels sooooo good to say that in the past tense) be globally hinged on Silicon Valley, why would you not expect to see a anomalously high number of US developers on it?

              • fruitcantfly@programming.dev
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                2
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                5 hours ago

                That’s definitely a possibility, along with the possibility that countries with worse English language skills might be underrepresented on GitHub, despite having universal healthcare. Conversely, if the US is over-represented on GitHub, then the pool of US developers who are not already active on GitHub may also be depleted compared to other countries. However, that is not something we can read out of the available evidence.

                The most we can conclude is probably that the US getting universal healthcare might result in an increase in available OSS developers, depending on which assumptions turn out to be correct, but suggesting that it would lead to an order of magnitude increase is surely premature

                • supersquirrel@sopuli.xyz
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  5 hours ago

                  suggesting that it would lead to an order of magnitude increase is surely premature

                  The US is continuing to worsen in performance on meaures of small business entrepreneurship in essentially all industries in the US, software and software adjacent industries are no different especially if you don’t get distracted by the AI bubble inflating that value of a bunch of illusions claiming to be businesses.

                  It is easy to see how the inability of the average person to try a new idea, or risk taking on a project that may not pay off immediately translates directly to a lack of available developers for open source software projects.

                  The impact of Universal Healthcare would be huge for open source development in the US, the amount of programmers that would be pushed over the line from “just making ends meet while having a work life balance” to “ok maybe I could devote some time to open source development”.

                  Don’t get me wrong though, I think we need to normalize straight up paying developers for Open Source Development. Just because it is open source doesn’t mean it doesn’t take labor, that is not the argument I am making.

                  https://www.commonwealthfund.org/publications/issue-briefs/2018/oct/affordable-care-act-impact-small-business

              • Zos_Kia@jlai.lu
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                5
                ·
                6 hours ago

                Oh man I’m like super agreeing with you. Also I’m in a place that actually has universal healthcare, so it’s not like it’s unworkable

        • ExLisper@lemmy.curiana.net
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          7
          ·
          11 hours ago

          https://github.com/rclone/rclone

          https://github.com/restic/restic

          https://github.com/bcpierce00/unison

          https://syncthing.net/

          The thing with old, critical software is that after some time people don’t really want to dig through decades of C code and prefer to write something new using modern tools. Those projects get plenty of support because people actually do want to work on them. If no one wants to work on rsync than what the maintainer is doing now is just prolong it’s agony a couple of years. I would say he should do the minimum work, announce end of life date and move on. People that need tools like rsync will develop something.

          Also, having critical software depend on one guy is not safe. We should avoid that. If critical software depends on one guy it should be phased out.

          • fruitcantfly@programming.dev
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            4
            ·
            10 hours ago

            Also, having critical software depend on one guy is not safe. We should avoid that. If critical software depends on one guy it should be phased out.

            Here are the percent of commits from the top committer in each repository you mentioned, as well as rsync, over the last 3 months:

            • rsync: 99.0%
            • restic: 93.2%
            • rclone: 87.5%
            • union: 82.9%
            • syncthing: 74.4%

            As you can see, each of this projects depends heavily on a single person, though to a lesser degree than rsync. That’s just the nature of most open-source software.

            Note that I excluded dependabot commits from the calculations and counted Claude commits as the lead developer for rsync

            • ExLisper@lemmy.curiana.net
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              edit-2
              9 hours ago

              How I imagine this:

              1. rsync gets end of life date
              2. People that rely on rsync start looking for alternatives
              3. They try to switch and figure out what functionality is missing
              4. They contribute to some of the alternative to fill the gaps

              For example, I’m about to setup some syncing for my homelab and I will not use rsync for that. That’s why talking about the state of rsync is important. As I said, it’s not about attacking the dev for not working hard enough. It’s about long term planning.

              • captcha_incorrect@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                3
                ·
                9 hours ago

                I remember when the maintainer for discord.py stepped down. He eventually stepped back in because no one wanted took over the project and he didn’t want to see it die. This was before the current AI era, all someone had to do was continue to develop it.

                I think almost everyone will do step 2 and 3 but not step 4.

                • ExLisper@lemmy.curiana.net
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  4
                  ·
                  9 hours ago

                  The fact that open source exist and functions so well for decades shows that people do step 4. If no one wants to step in it usually means the project is not important.

          • wewbull@feddit.uk
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            11 hours ago

            The trouble with some of those projects (e.g. unison and sun thing) is that they don’t solve the same problem, not really.

            A rewrite with modern tooling would be better done if it was incremental.

      • Kissaki@programming.dev
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        16 hours ago

        Is that your assumption given that they’re using AI? Because it’s not at all what I have taken away from their article.

        Is “not properly maintained anymore” your interpretation of them using AI? Or what do you base that on?

        • ExLisper@lemmy.curiana.net
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          10
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          16 hours ago

          The whole story started because rsync stopped working for some users. That’s “not properly maintained” in my books.

          • Kissaki@programming.dev
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            4
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            15 hours ago

            I don’t know the degree to that, but bugs do happen occasionally either way as long as there are changes. In the article, they explain why the changes are necessary. Prioritizing security over no-change-stability seems reasonable and warranted.

            • ExLisper@lemmy.curiana.net
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              4
              arrow-down
              4
              ·
              15 hours ago

              The author said:

              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.

              So as I said, I don’t think it’s fair to scream at him to work harder. I do think it’s fair to worn people that rsync is having issues with stability. The author claims he knows what he’s doing and it’s all on purpose. You are free to trust him and ignore the whole affair. Other people may prefer to look for alternatives.

    • JATothrim_v2@programming.dev
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      11
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      19 hours ago

      I doubly agree to this. The moment you are deciding the license of your fucking software please think carefully. It is a public service and the dev(s) ow you nothing. Not even an apology. What you own to the devs is much greater and very high on value. They made the software that runs on your own paid electricity, that you granted to them.

    • bignose@programming.dev
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      8
      arrow-down
      11
      ·
      22 hours ago

      Either we get him more resources or we STFU about the retired dev using AI. We can’t have it both ways.

      Of course we can do both. I don’t have those resources to grant

      and I get to point out that Tridge, despite his well earned reputation from the huge contribution of creating rsync and bringing it to the point where it’s effectively complete as an essential piece of internet infrastructure, was massively arrogant in abdicating his responsibility by shovelling LLM slop into that same piece of infrastructure.

      • Kissaki@programming.dev
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        8
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        16 hours ago

        In your eyes, is all AI-produced text and code slop? Or did you check on the Python tests they designed and implemented with the help of AI, and after analysis of that, you came to the conclusion that it’s slop (as in nonsensical, incoherent, faulty, or similar)?