this post was submitted on 07 Mar 2026
548 points (95.7% liked)

Selfhosted

60093 readers
917 users here now

A place to share alternatives to popular online services that can be self-hosted without giving up privacy or locking you into a service you don't control.

Rules:

  1. Be civil: we're here to support and learn from one another. Insults won't be tolerated. Flame wars are frowned upon.

  2. No spam.

  3. Posts here are to be centered around self-hosting. Please ensure it is clear in your post how it relates to self-hosting.

  4. Don't duplicate the full text of your blog or git here. Just post the link for folks to click.

  5. Submission headline should match the article title.

  6. No trolling.

  7. Promotion posts require your active participation in selfhosting or related communities, or the post will be removed. No more than 10% of your posts or comments may be self-promotional, or your post will be removed. F/LOSS Exception: If your post is about a project that is completely open source & can be self-hosted in full without payment, and your account is at least 7 days old, your post is exempt from this rule as long as you continue to engage in comments.

Resources:

Any issues on the community? Report it using the report flag.

Questions? DM the mods!

founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
 

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 are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] sonofearth@lemmy.world 32 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago) (5 children)

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.

[–] chicken@lemmy.dbzer0.com 24 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago)

because I don’t know jackshit about coding and I am not gonna pretend I do.

But if OP does know and applies that knowledge to what they are doing, it's not the same thing and doesn't make sense to have the same disclaimer.

[–] terraincognita@lemmy.world 13 points 3 months ago

Partially agree, but I do know how to code and use it as a tool.

[–] terraincognita@lemmy.world 0 points 3 months ago (1 children)

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.

[–] Tibi@discuss.tchncs.de 9 points 3 months ago (1 children)

Testcoverage by ai generated Tests is close to worthless. "Tests are only as good as the person writing them"

Did you generate your tests?

[–] terraincognita@lemmy.world 1 points 3 months ago

I agree with you, therefore I also need contributors for that. It is difficult to run this on my own, as I have basic in coding, but not a tester, so I have to use agentic workflow to check after it was generated, so it is not just like hiding sh*t.

[–] Zak@lemmy.world -4 points 3 months ago

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.