My wife needed a cycle tracker. Everything out there was either Flo (which got sued twice for sharing health data) or an abandoned GitHub project. So I built Ovumcy. Single Go binary, SQLite, Docker-ready. No analytics, no third-party APIs, no cloud. Your data stays on your server. Features: period tracking, symptom logging, predictions (ovulation, fertile window), statistics, CSV/JSON export, dark mode, Russian and English. Just pushed v0.2.5. Looking for feedback from real users.
You should add a disclaimer stating that you have used an LLM. I have done so for a tool I built with an LLM that I needed, because I don’t know jackshit about coding and I am not gonna pretend I do.
But if OP does know and apply that knowledge to what they are doing, it’s not the same thing and doesn’t make sense to have the same disclaimer.
Partially agree, but I do know how to code and use it as a tool.
Why?
It makes sense to try to give users an idea of how robust a project is, but the exact details of the tools involved in its creation rarely add much to that. It gets a little weird with LLMs because they allow someone with no programming skill to create software that appears to work, which ought to be disclosed; “I don’t know what I’m doing and I asked a robot to make this” does indicate unreliable code. A skilled developer having an LLM fill in some extra test cases, on the other hand can only make the project more robust.
It’s not realistic to expect no AI assistance in coding in 2026.
It’s also not a stand-in for a human. There’s a huge field of gray where it’s unclear how much of it was fully vibe coded vs how much is carefully hand reviewed and/or written.
I’ve been a professional developer for decades and I’ve done both. Obviously I’ve hand coded stuff for many years. The fully vibe coded stuff is personal, to test and learn the capabilities of the tech. My professional stuff I watch much more closely, and I’m much more targeted in what I’m having the AI do.
That said, if I were gonna use this I’d actually review the code. I’m not recommending this guy’s stuff, but you can’t rule it out on the basis of ai assistance alone.
A bunch of people who couldn’t tell their left shift from their right shoelace think you don’t know what you’re talking about lol.
I agree, to a person who knows the machine, an AI is like a compiler: you know the output you’re going for, the tool helps you get there faster. Expecting you to do something the slow way because someone else doesn’t know how to code is nonsense. There is a massive difference between using it as a tool, and blindly taking generated code.
If the internet existed in the 70s, I bet people would have asked for a disclaimer on compiled assembly.
Guess I’ll stick to unrealistic software then.
It may not be a stand in for a human, but that’s exactly how many of these vibe coded projects are. It’s not unreasonable to ask the developer to spend 30 seconds to describe how they use these tools.
You can see that I use some of metrics, like test coverage, estimates and so on to prove its validation as potentially serious project, that will grow from a pet one.
Testcoverage by ai generated Tests is close to worthless. “Tests are only as good as the person writing them”
Did you generate your tests?