I really meant -- are these maintainers passionate about the design and maintenance of their tools, are they trying to slop up a demo fast enough that some VC buys them out, is this project a goal in itself or the means to some other end, etc...
Open source software that exists for its own sake is exceedingly rare, and understanding the goals of a community before becoming dependent on it is a good idea
OK! This makes sense, and I agree. But I don't think banning LLM usage gets us there. LLMs are going to be used for coding, whether anyone likes it or not. I think focusing on the effort and care that is put into the codebase is a good metric: LLM generated code that is reviewed by teams of professionals, for example, is a huge win, and should be encouraged.
I readily concede that there is a huge volume of inexperienced programmers generating crap, though.
Can you elaborate on this? It's new that we're judging what kind of people we're dealing with based on what tools they use.