The interface looks vibecoded. I have no problem with people vibecoding things. In fact, I have zero frontend skills, so I rely on AI to be able to make easy-to-use interfaces. However, I feel like this should be clearly and prominently displayed in the project page.
Furthermore it is a little off-putting to see a vibecoded UI because I have very little confidence that the rest of the backend code is not vibecoded. I know I am possibly being unfair, but this is how it looks to me. If the developer tells me they didn't use AI at all, I would believe it.
It definitely is and you can see it in the git commits. The DNS wire protocol parser was the original learning project I wrote to understand the spec. Later features (recursive resolver, DNSSEC validation, the dashboard) were built with the help of AI
I dont get this criticism at all, would you prefer someone write a shittier UI? And since when were people writing amazing bug free software before hand where not being vibe coded meant you could trust its good software?
I guess to be fair, beforehand no body would be attempting this kind of thing and releasing it unless they knew what they were doing
Both GP's and your example in effect mean "I'm fine with other people doing this, but I don't want to have anything to do with it, or at least be able to decide case-by-case."
Which is a valid stance IMO.
In the OP, a vibecoded UI when the whole project emphasizes "I did this myself, from scratch" is a bit awkward.
Does "I did this myself" mean they read all the relevant specs and then wrote the code - or did they just write the prompts themselves?
Edit: OP already answered and confirmed that they in fact did write the code themselves.
Furthermore it is a little off-putting to see a vibecoded UI because I have very little confidence that the rest of the backend code is not vibecoded. I know I am possibly being unfair, but this is how it looks to me. If the developer tells me they didn't use AI at all, I would believe it.