4 comments

  • ucirello1 hour ago
    author here!<p>I have been working on this for my own use until recently, when I shared with the rest of the team, and we thought it would be nice to let the world see it.<p>I have been interested in autonomous code development for quite some time (at least since March&#x2F;April 2025) - and summer &#x27;25 is when I felt the models were good enough to be pushed to autonomy.<p>I wrote a bit about it[0], and sgai is the incarnation of my take on AI autonomous coding.<p>sgai is not even v0 yet, a lot of work to be done to improve its implementation - but I think it should be usable enough for those willing to give it a try.<p>0: <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;cirello.org&#x2F;aifactory.html" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;cirello.org&#x2F;aifactory.html</a>
  • fuddle52 minutes ago
    Sgai (pronounced &quot;Sky&quot;) - That&#x27;s a bit of a stretch
    • sandgardenhq10 minutes ago
      You know, I tried to convince people of a number of various other pronunciations. But when we saw it written down, everyone just naturally pronounced it &quot;sky.&quot; My natural impulse was to avoid it, since there are already a ton of AI-related things called Sky, but I think I&#x27;ve accepted that it was inevitable.<p>Besides -- and I&#x27;ve obviously thought about this a little too much -- when you actually say the word &quot;sky,&quot; are you using a hard k? After saying it out loud to myself about a billion times (and long after the word lost all meaning) I think I actually use a hard g.
    • zwaps43 minutes ago
      Depends on the language no? Works in German
  • embedding-shape1 hour ago
    Interesting license choice, modified MIT it seems, with this additional clause:<p>&gt; No licensee or downstream recipient may use the Software (including any modified or derivative versions) to directly compete with the original Licensor by offering it to third parties as a hosted, managed, or Software-as-a-Service (SaaS) product or cloud service where the primary value of the service is the functionality of the Software itself.<p>Doesn&#x27;t that kind of conflict with the &quot;including without limitation the rights to use, copy, modify, merge, publish, distribute, sublicense, and&#x2F;or sell copies of the Software&quot; part of regular MIT, which your custom license also includes for some reason?<p>I think you might be better of with just not trying to do it &quot;kind of open source but also not&quot; and just say &quot;Copyright 2026 Sandgarden.com&quot; or whatever, instead of the mix of proprietary and open source. Then you get 100% &quot;full control&quot; over what people can do with the source, and don&#x27;t have to worry about anything when it comes to licensing :)
    • ucirello1 hour ago
      author here! the decision was mine; if anything, the senior leadership was fine with an unencumbered open-source license. What <i>I</i> didn&#x27;t want was someone using it to make a business out of this tool without me in the mix.<p>In a sense, a futile effort; because if you reverse engineer a nlspec and rebuild it, then you can have it with any license you may want.
      • embedding-shape1 hour ago
        I wasn&#x27;t doubting it wasn&#x27;t you making the decision! :)<p>I was more curious why go with modifying a FOSS license (which clearly isn&#x27;t the right choice if you want to prevent others from doing whatever with it) instead of just straight up keeping full copyright to yourself&#x2F;the company and a &quot;regular&quot; license?<p>Then you get exactly what you want, without also sending double-messages about that people can do whatever they want, which is what you&#x27;re trying to prevent.
        • zwaps40 minutes ago
          He said why, he wanted to open source it with the mentioned exception.<p>I think there are also licenses that do that, and revert to full MIT after some time, but the author decided to roll their own.<p>What’s the problem with that? He can license it however he wants and the reason he mentions is perfectly valid tbh
  • nicoleao49 minutes ago
    Very nice, the automated setup instructions for opencode are a genius touch, more people should do that.<p>Is this already your daily driver for coding projects?
    • ucirello46 minutes ago
      author here! it is my daily driver for quite some time; with that said, its current shape is a bit of a more recent development. Initially, I would manually handle jj workspaces and fire out screen&#x2F;tmux sessions; but over time, I figure it would be nice to have an UI that I could browse from anywhere through a VPN.<p>It does take some investment -- by adding customizations through the overlay folder (`sgai&#x2F;` directory at the root of the repository) -- but eventually it should be able to code in a way that you would approve in a PR.