Comment by scosman

2 months ago

Spent 15 minutes the other day testing a patch I received that claimed to fix a bug (Linux UI bug, not my forte).

The “fix” was setting completely fictitious properties. Someone has plugged the GitHub issue into ChatGPT, spat out an untested answer.

What’s even the point…

13 comments

scosman

Reply
thenickdude  2 months ago

It's all in aid of some streetsweeper being able to add "contributor to X, Y, Z projects!" to their GitHub résumé. Before LLMs were a thing I also received worthless spelling-incorrection pull requests with the same aim.

  • craftkiller  2 months ago

    Are spelling correction PRs not welcome? I'd never put it on a résumé but if I'm following a README and I see a typo, I'll generally open a quick PR to fix that. (no automated tools, not scanning for typos, just a human reading a README).

    • palmotea  2 months ago

      > Are spelling correction PRs not welcome?

      I think a true spelling correction would be welcome. But I think the kind BS attitude the GP is describing often leads to useless reformatting/language tweaks, because the goal isn't to make the repo better, it's to make a change for making a change's sake with as little effort as possible.

      2 replies →

    • naet  2 months ago

      A real improvement to the documentation or readme is welcome, even if it is only a minor improvement. I have put in small grammar PRs on some documentation myself.

      On the flip side, I used to get a lot of spam PRs that made an arbitrary or net neutral change to our readme, presumably just to get "contributor" credit. That is not welcome or helpful to anyone.

    • renewiltord  2 months ago

      > Before LLMs were a thing I also received worthless spelling-incorrection pull requests with the same aim.

      I always find it a pity when someone has been clever and it's missed. "Spelling incorrection", get it? It's not a correction. It's the opposite.

      2 replies →