News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:The fate of "small" open source by bloomca on Sunday November 16, 2025 @05:08PM (#45948874)
But in a lot of cases you can't know all the dependencies, so you lean on the community trusting that a package solves the problem well enough that you can abstract it.

You can pin the dependency and review the changes for security reasons, but fully grasping the logic is non-trivial.

Smaller dependencies are fine to copy at first, but at some point the codebase becomes too big, so you abstract it and at that point it becomes a self-maintained dependency. Which is a fair decision, but it is all about tradeoffs and sometimes too costly.

Re:The fate of "small" open source by mkj on Sunday November 16, 2025 @06:44PM (#45949544)
You'd get those benefits from traditional dependencies if you copy them in and never update. Is an AI dependency going to have the equivalent of "upstream fixes"?
Re:The fate of "small" open source by cortesoft on Sunday November 16, 2025 @11:28PM (#45950846)
Probably? LLMs will train on fixes, then if you run the code through the LLM again to fix it.