> keeping it up-to-date with its dependencies etc.
not if the software is functional today, and doesn't require interacting with third party systems (like this tinylittleoffice suite).
By the time the underlying infrastructure (like browser compatibility, or self-hosting OS becoming obsolete) fails, you're likely no longer using it anyway.
The "documents" seem exportable in text format, and in any case, potentially salvageable with another vibe-coded tool if such need arise.
Therefore, the original author is no required to maintain it.
That's a rosy eyed view. users running outdated code not getting security fixes are sweet honeypots for modern automated llm-backed mass exploitation machine long before something obviously fails for you.
you'll be spending tokens on getting it maintained, and if you don't spend enough you get pwned by guys who do. who exactly is winning in this scenario?
This is the part managerial and marketing types don't understand. Their expectation is usually that "since its a computer system (sic) the tech team will support it from now on".
patching dependencies correctly was one of the first agentic coding tasks llm solved 100%. you will need to dedicate a session once a year to to such patches. Or community of vibe coders will do it for you .
That has always been the case with anything self-hosted. Otherwise you're putting a lot of faith in an upstream maintainer to actually put in the effort which they may or may not be doing.
And then you're also the maintainer of the software in charge of keeping it up-to-date with its dependencies etc.
> keeping it up-to-date with its dependencies etc.
not if the software is functional today, and doesn't require interacting with third party systems (like this tinylittleoffice suite).
By the time the underlying infrastructure (like browser compatibility, or self-hosting OS becoming obsolete) fails, you're likely no longer using it anyway.
The "documents" seem exportable in text format, and in any case, potentially salvageable with another vibe-coded tool if such need arise.
Therefore, the original author is no required to maintain it.
That's a rosy eyed view. users running outdated code not getting security fixes are sweet honeypots for modern automated llm-backed mass exploitation machine long before something obviously fails for you.
you'll be spending tokens on getting it maintained, and if you don't spend enough you get pwned by guys who do. who exactly is winning in this scenario?
"democratizing software"...
12 replies →
This is the part managerial and marketing types don't understand. Their expectation is usually that "since its a computer system (sic) the tech team will support it from now on".
patching dependencies correctly was one of the first agentic coding tasks llm solved 100%. you will need to dedicate a session once a year to to such patches. Or community of vibe coders will do it for you .
Use AI to maintain it.
AI doesn’t magically maintain things, you still have some human overhead.
2 replies →
This is trivial now. It can even be automated. Literally just type “automatically monitor and maintain x” into Claude or Codex.
Vibe code it without dependencies?
No I'm not, Claude is
lol, paying a big tech company for tokens is not democratizing software
2 replies →
No need for simple offline website stuff like shown here.
It’s not simple at all. Check the source: https://github.com/aboard-io/tinylittleoffice
Yeah, but then toolchain security is yours to handle.
That has always been the case with anything self-hosted. Otherwise you're putting a lot of faith in an upstream maintainer to actually put in the effort which they may or may not be doing.
always has been
when the software is supposedly maintained, too