Lutris now being built with Claude AI, developer decides to hide it after backlash https://www.gamingonlinux.com/2026/03/lutris-now-being-built-with-claude-ai-developer-decides-to-hide-it-after-backlash/

[cad@buried.im]

@gamingonlinux Lutris is a great tool. Shame to see the developer now hiding the AI commits, as you state it’s no way to build trust.

[nicholai@helvede.net]

@gamingonlinux
Time to fork.

[pasci_lei@social.pascal-leinert.de]

@gamingonlinux@mastodon.social As long it functions I don't care.

[aho@ioc.exchange]

@gamingonlinux sure LLMs can write code, but it's not better than the source used and the issue is that nowadays there is already a lot of code that has been generated by even older versions of LLMs, which will affect newer LLMs.

Sure I do see use of the LLMs like for figuring out the variables needed to use with a function, give some idea how to do somethings so you don't have to spend a half day to figure it out from some LLM generated source...

But let it really code, nah... we really need to get a working AI first before that will be innovative and able to think of consequences of the code

and sure the issue with license too, the code the LLM has been trained with will have a large range of different licenses, the code it borrows may have a lot different license than what the program you write has, and if there is some closed source included then wow...

[xtrems876@tech.lgbt]

@gamingonlinux overall an unpleasant situation. The issue reads like an insult "is lutris slop now" and was responded to with defensiveness (hiding claude co authorship). There were no heroes here and nothing of substance was achieved. In a better world this would've been a productive discussion

[chris2000sp@social.anoxinon.de]

@gamingonlinux
Better use Local LLM's and only use Training Data from legal licenses. Actually CC0, MIT or BSD Licenses could be compatible with legally AI training i guess. We need better Licensing on AI Training Data.

[gunther@wetdry.world]

@gamingonlinux Hiding use of AI tools in an open source projects is a bad look, but I have up admit that I agree with the dev's overall attitude toward AI coding tools. If you want everything you use to be hand-coded, fork the project and do it yourself.
FOSS developers are so underesourced as-is, it seems like mostly self-righteousness to demand they not use tools you don't like. Regardless though, the developer should be transparent so that people who don't like it can make an informed decision.

[gabriel@mastodon.samfira.com]

@gamingonlinux What I see is 370+ contributors to the project with only 1 or 2 that contribute to it on a regular basis. And now "threats" of forking the project from various people.

Who knows, perhaps if more people contributed the same amount of energy in helping out the original project, as they are prepared to invest in their own fork, the dev would not be burnt out/depressed maintaining an open source project we just use for free. Like it or not, AI is a force multiplier. Can't blame him.

[james_baker@social.linux.pizza]

@gunther @gamingonlinux

I agree. We should be celebrating any successful FOSS project and not criticise them for using what is now industry standard tools.

Do you care what PC they run their dev setup on and how ethically sourced their components were? Do you care what energy powers their home/workplace? Do you care if they use a spell checker or linter?

This may just be outrage du jour.

[raktheundead@vmst.io]

@gamingonlinux:

[qwarin@gaygeek.social]

@gamingonlinux bummer, Lutris was a great tool... -_-

[james_baker@social.linux.pizza]

@aho @gamingonlinux

If you are an experienced developer, LLM tools speed up coding ~30% and the code is as maintainable as human code downstream.

- YouTube

Auf YouTube findest du die angesagtesten Videos und Tracks. Außerdem kannst du eigene Inhalte hochladen und mit Freunden oder gleich der ganzen Welt teilen.

(www.youtube.com)

The licensing issue is gross, and there is a question on consolidating yet more power in US tech companies. Alternatives are available that don't have those issues.

[james_baker@social.linux.pizza]

@pasci_lei @gamingonlinux This is the right answer.

[james_baker@social.linux.pizza]

@gabriel @gamingonlinux Nobody who refuses to use AI LLMs will fork Lutris. It would be a full time job for 2 months just to catch up with the codebase unassisted. They are hollow threats.

[jigend@mastodon.social]

@gamingonlinux Is journalism slop now?

[placebo@mastodon.ie]

@gunther @gamingonlinux the issue is that developers can't be transparent because of the outrage. It only creates an incentive to hide and lie. Once again, the outrage is directed at a regular person trying to do something good for the community, as if they were responsible for every bad decision made by the CEOs.

[gamingonlinux@mastodon.social]

@JigenD are you saying the article is slop for reporting it?

[gabriel@mastodon.samfira.com]

@james_baker @gamingonlinux

Yeah. I agree. I maintain a couple of Open Source projects. Finding regular contributors is exceptionally difficult. I have been fortunate that the communities around those projects are amazing, but very few people actually send patches (which is ok - not everyone writes code). But it does mean that there is a lot of work to do. I get it. We don't like AI. Then send patches. Help out. I guarantee that this is the reaction of any Open Source maintainer.

[jigend@mastodon.social]

@gamingonlinux Your stated opinion in the piece, stating "Every extra person using all these AI tools is only adding to the issue." and "Not just that but copyright becomes an issue. Who actually owns the generated code? And now it's being hidden, how can anyone tell? Can you even truly claim it's open source when it's using AI generated code?" belies an ignorance of software development and an unhelpful bias of reporting. Open source projects don't need idiots swarming them.

[mae@is.badat.dev]

@JigenD @gamingonlinux what the fuck are you saying