• rako@tarte.nuage-libre.frFrançais
        29 days

        What would I report it for ? It’s perfectly fine for the author to modify the title if it is needed no ?

        • curbstickle_lw@lemmy.worldEnglish
          27 days

          Because it creates an OT discussion and the tag doesn’t apply. A discussion I won’t necessarily know about until after its gone on and gotten heated.

          Comments aren’t for rule policing, just use the report button please.

          Italics = fixed crappy autocorrect. Be a use? Wtf.

      • rako@tarte.nuage-libre.frFrançais
        30 days

        a project that used AI in development in any capacity. Disclosure is required for how it was used.

        The number one sign, there is an AGENTS.md file: https://github.com/Zavy86/WikiDocs/blob/main/AGENTS.md

        (There are actually 4, depending on the part the user works on)

        The readme contains “ready for use with the LLM tools you choose” which is the reason I said “AI-oriented”

        it’s not my project

        But you’re doing the promotion of it, and I suspect rules need to be clarified here. The most important to me was to flag that AI might have been used here, and it’s not clear, whoever the author is.

        EDIT: asked the question here: https://lemmy.world/post/52376145

          • rako@tarte.nuage-libre.frFrançais
            29 days

            I see you want to sink me under a lot of points, allow me to do the same:

            1. You’d have to be really naive to think that a project contains four AGENTS.md files and pretend AI wasn’t used
            2. .editorconfig is, at it says, a config for editors. You can pretty much infer that an editor was used, but you can’t say which. Just like an AGENTS.md indicates an AI was used, or is expected to be used, but you can’t know which one
            3. I said this project is AI-oriented, which the phrase you cite conforts.
            4. No one here is saying that Claude coded it. I raised the point because I assume AI was used, and this is what the policy talks about
            5. “Your promotional post” talks about the post, not the project
            6. “If you are promoting a project” talks about you promoting the project, meaning the post, not the project
            7. This is /c/selfhosted on lemmy.world. Other communities have other rules. The post you point to is made in another community, it’s irrelevant here.
            8. This is /c/selfhosted on lemmy.world. I’m asking the question in the community. Note that my instance isn’t lemmy.world.
            9. The discussion isn’t stickied nor linked from the rules. But it does exist

            Shall we next audit every IDE autocomplete suggestion the dev ever accepted, look at their CV, review their commit history and inspect what they ate for lunch?

            Is it possible to discuss as adults or do you have to resort to absurd arguments ?

            I assume that the tags don’t exist but to convey information. The information is relevant whether the author of the post is the author of the project or not, that’s why I asked for it.

            If you want my opinion on something that, as you said, as already be decided: if it’s too complicated to know whether AI was used, then flag it as AIP. There will be issues, just like any decision, but it will be a different set of issues. But are you really interested in my opinion or do you just want to pretend differing opinions are absurd ?

            Or can we just share cool things we find and let end users make up their own minds?

            That wouldn’t be in the spirit of disclosure, the one that was accepted by the community and for which you pinged a moderator now would it

  • cecilkorik@lemmy.caEnglish
    1 month

    This is good thinking, and you may still want something like this anyway, as there’s always room for additional documentation, but let me propose an alternative that takes this good way of thinking a step further:

    Infrastructure-as-code means my code is my documentation. How’s it configured? Look at the code. What’s it doing? Look at the code. Don’t understand why it’s doing that? Use more descriptive names for things and write more self-explanatory code. Is the code out of date with the current state? Stop implementing things manually and make the code run automatically instead so it’s never out of date anymore.

    I have complete confidence in my setup and life is easy now. Except when the IAC breaks. But that’s rarely a panic situation, just mildly frustrating.

  • Arda@piefed.socialEnglish
    1 month

    Yeah yeah ill document everything one day, when all is “done”…

    Jokes aside I just use outline for everything but I wanted something more lightweight as a kind of backup that works with plain text, other ones I didn’t quite like but this seems just right

    • punkibas@lemmy.zipEnglish
      1 month

      I tried both, as well as others, when searching for my wiki, ended up with otterwiki too, it’s just really good, I specially liked that the markdown files don’t need metadata hidden in each one of them, and the concept of the entire wiki being a repository. Also, being able to just drop markdown files wherever and the wiki will pick them up and put them in the correct order

  • PlexSheep@infosec.pubEnglish
    1 month

    This is coop but I tailored my need away by just not documenting.

    Or maybe I should say the docker compose files are the documentation?

  • solrize@lemmy.mlEnglish
    1 month

    If no database, how is revision history maintained? Of course while there’s nothing wrong with someone deciding to write yet another self-hosted wiki, is there anything special about this one? “apt install gitit” has worked ok for me when I’ve wanted a low hassle wiki.

    • Eldaroth@lemmy.worldEnglish
      1 month

      Well I assume this is thought to be used in conjunction with a Git repository (as its all just markdown files). So this would handle revision history for you.