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.
I was going to recommend this to someone I know but when I realised your readme.md is entirely AI-generated, I guess the whole project is probably vibe-coded. I can’t in good conscience recommend someone trust their health data to a vide-coded app because they tend to have security problems.
Also all ai-generated code is public domain so your AGPL license is kinda empty. Might as well use MIT.
I do use AI tools while developing this project, but I also have a BSc in Computer Science. AI is a productivity tool.
Security is something I take seriously, especially since the project deals with health data. All code has test and you’re welcome to inspect the repository yourself or point out any specific security concerns if you notice them.
Regarding licensing: the AGPL license applies to the project as a whole regardless of the tools used to write parts of the code.
If you have concrete technical feedback or security issues, I’d genuinely appreciate it.
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.
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.
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.
Partially agree, but I do know how to code and use it as a tool.
Charitably, it could be an AI readme and hand rolled code, but it definitely is a smell.
Yeah there are other signs too. Look at those commit messages, all vague, all perfectly capitalized. All with a nice long description with bullet points.
No one does that in a project they’re building for themselves.
I answered earlier, that I use AI and this is just a commit skill for an agent.