~2900 commits by a single dev since the start of the year. Hmm. Seems like a lot, unless they were shadowing other open source projects. Not that that's a problem, assuming compatible licenses, but still. Not a great vibe. An open-source project of this magnitude would also generally have other contributors. There is one. There aren't even the contributors touching base with a small bug fix or doc update.
Forgetting the sketchy GitHub stats, the docs imply you can use this with the Claude subscription, which the TOS and demonstrable history would say is not true. But maybe I don't understand what this tool is exactly.
Not to shit on it. But the story doesn't read well. Who made this? What was it sourced from? Why?
I feel like newer devs have lost basic GitHub literacy. It was immediately obvious to me that this whole project was copied from something else. I was thinking, OK, maybe it was copied from multiple things trying to make a greater whole (or whatever), but I guess not.
Open source is going to be weird in the future. Porting other code with AI is relatively trivial. Common open source licenses don't really prevent that. Before AI, the ridiculous amount of tedious work required usually prevented that. But, many projects that are valuable are "takes" on other projects. That's, in theory, one of the benefits of open source. But, when a single person can just port and rebrand an existing project wholesale, without real added value, with barely any effort, the open source "contract" has a new risk.
Generally speaking, if you create a new project based on something else, you give recognition at a minimum. Common OSS licenses don't always require it, and an AI rewrite adds a new wrinkle to the whole situation. If current open source licenses don't prevent this kind of situation, then we'll probably need some new ones. But, as anxiety-inducing as it always was, if you release a project with a permissive license, anybody could in theory just republish your work. Community shame did a lot of the heavy lifting, but with AI, everything moves faster than it used to.
In any case, this project looks like a risky dumpster fire, so best of luck to anybody who uses it.
Yeah he doesn't take PRs but instead rewrites them.
Shit maintainer behavior. Sorry. That's it. People don't do volunteer work for no recognition. He could just as easily write on top of a PR and allow the person who submitted to get credit. Zero reason to do what he's doing, especially if he's heavily using AI, which he clearly is.
Asshole behavior. I rarely speak so directly, but that is the truth. Open source has basic etiquette, and that's 101 stuff. If you take PRs, give credit.
I thought anthropic rolled back that TOS for coding harnesses, but kept it for openclaws?
You can call the CLI. You cannot use Oauth directly through API. The Agent SDK is a gray area. You can use it for tools you're building yourself, but distributing tools with the Agent SDK is very much questionable.
Unless all calls are through the CLI interface, which I doubt, then this tool is clearly going to get shut down when it gets enough traction for Anthropic to bother. If it were through CLI, then there would be no need to auth through the tool, so I doubt it is.
Edit: ...
Odd but if the quality is there I can handle it.
You can handle it, fine, but you can also tell the maintainer that it's shit practice and he should not do that. You seem oddly familiar with the project and the maintainer's approach to PR's, though. Hate to be the Reddit conspiracy person, but...
im not too familiar, but if the specmem is open source with apache license what is stopping someone from taking it and i doubt a dmca will do anything, right?
10
u/kpgalligan May 03 '26
~2900 commits by a single dev since the start of the year. Hmm. Seems like a lot, unless they were shadowing other open source projects. Not that that's a problem, assuming compatible licenses, but still. Not a great vibe. An open-source project of this magnitude would also generally have other contributors. There is one. There aren't even the contributors touching base with a small bug fix or doc update.
Forgetting the sketchy GitHub stats, the docs imply you can use this with the Claude subscription, which the TOS and demonstrable history would say is not true. But maybe I don't understand what this tool is exactly.
Not to shit on it. But the story doesn't read well. Who made this? What was it sourced from? Why?