Im looking at moving to Pi and I like the minimal nature, but I disagree with a handful of decisions they make. So Id likely need to maintain a fork which is less than ideal.
What decisions is Mario making that you disagree with? My impression is Pi is minimal so any changes can live on top of Pi without needing to maintain a fork?
I started developing my own coding agent after using Pi for a couple months, so I’m curious what you don’t like about pi.
When I hear Mario talk about pi and his approach I find myself agreeing with a lot of it. But I also find myself agreeing with a lot of the points from this https://www.thevinter.com/blog/bad-vibes-from-pi
the opinions in question are that bash should be enabled by default with no restrictions, that the agent should have access to every file on your machine from the start, and that npm is the only package manager worth supporting. Bold choices.
To save others a click, though the article is worth reading.
He also mentions no subagents by default in pi as well.
That (and oh-my-pi) seem like an excessive swing in the other direction. Im all for the simplicity and minimalism of pi. There are just a few fundamental things that need updated (mainly subagent context and open-by-default security model).
yup thats mine. :)
i actually had some stuff layered into mono pi, and i frankly hit my limit in terms of architecture issues in monopi, omp aka oh my pi is frankly better architectured. if you pared back the fearure set to be minimal, you would full stop have a better designed minimal harness.
i do have a proper next gen no slop harness in the work.
amusingly , dog fooding existing tools with my improvements layered in, has repeatedly validated my design choices and if anything has reduced my tolerance for the errors that seem to happen in vanilla or first party harnesses
