So when the news circulated recently that the Lutris developer was using Claude to help write the code (and the angry posts/articles appeared) I figured I’d reach out to Mathieu to hear the other side of things.

I chatted to him a little, asking for his side of the story. He goes into some depth on how he uses it as part of his work-flow, the transparency in open-source projects in general, licensing and ownership of code that A.I. writes, safety and so on. Plenty of answers from Lutris, if you’re curious on the topic. As ever, you can find the link here:

https://gardinerbryant.com/mathieu-comandon-explains-his-use-of-ai-in-lutris-development/

  • Mordikan@kbin.earth
    6·
    7 days ago

    I want to hate on this guy, but at the same time this is just the reality of a lot of workflows these days. Most programmers I know professionally will do boilerplate work with Claude Code (like the chainsaw analogy he gave) and then do the more meaningful work themselves. Same for automating commit schedules.

    Especially for small low-impact projects like Lutris (linux community loves it, but its just 3 people), if you’re going to maintain development speed, involving AI automation is probably going to be more of a positive to you than a negative. The real issue would be if the AI use snowballs and they unrealistically increase the scope of their project as that’s when most projects actually start to die.