← Back to context

Comment by verdverm

3 hours ago

I'm in the same boat. I was the primary advocate for fixing the config security regressions in the OpenCode tool (separate from the console hack days after the fix). My impression is that they are improving quality across the board. I will not being updating to v2 because I do not jive with the new UX. I would recommend checking it out, it's the best open harness I've used so far, though I'm only interesed in TUIs.

I'm currently using the Pi harness as well, it's closer to OpenCode v1 with a few plugins. However, I have zero faith in their security or maturity after several communications with the CEO. Pi is also developed by an Israeli team, if that is something that matters to you, re: Mossad concerns or Palestinians rights.

I'm going to go back to my own custom harness and do a full rewrite, now that I have seen what 6+ other harnesses offer.

4 comments

verdverm

Reply
cvanelteren  3 hours ago

Last time I checked Pi is developed by Austrians?

  • verdverm  2 hours ago

    We may both be partially right, the main dev I interacted with has Tel Aviv on his GitHub (also 'Hanna' being around the project, but apparently that is a surname not a first name, and a mistaken extrapolation on my part)

    https://github.com/davidbrai

    https://github.com/earendil-works/pi/issues/10895

    The lack of professionalism or seriousness was mainly in a private email chain with Armin. He added a single comment to this issue after that chain which was the gist of a couple of his replies, less snarky. Either way, the interaction left me disappointed, not a founder who seems interested in listening or learning imo.

octoberfranklin  3 hours ago

Security is not the harness' job, it's the sandbox's job. These are two different tools, you need both of them.