According to the release:
Adds experimental PostgreSQL support
The code was written by Cursor and Claude
14,997 added lines of code, and 10,202 lines removed
reviewed and heavily tested over 2-3 weeks
This makes me uneasy, especially as ntfy is an internet facing service. I am now looking for alternatives.
Am I overreacting or do you all share the same concern?
The size of that changeset means that it’s inherently unreviewable.
The commit history is something I’ve seen only in the PRs that even the most dysfunctional companies would demand a rewrite for.
Also, 2-3 weeks review? PostgreSQL support could be added in that time without the need for a damn „vibe check”. Hell, it would probably take less time than that.
To be fair they would have needed to spend time testing the manual implementation as well.
The problem I see mainly is that even if this rolls out perfectly, the erratic and changing nature if llms still make it pointless as a proof of concept. Next time Claude might fuck up in a fringe way that’s not covered by unit tests and is missed by manual tests.
On the other hand I guess I’ve been guilty myself on numerous occasions to implement fringe bugs into production code, but at least I learn from it.
I made my statement as a BDD/TDD practitioner.
The code goal of software engineering is not to deliver said code, but to deliver it in a framework that lets others—and consequently me in a week’s time—to contribute easily. This makes both future improvements and bug fixes easier.
Dumping a ~25000 lines changeset with a git history that’s almost designed to confuse is antithetical to both engineering and open source.