I read their "why use our fork" page, and it's very obviously AI-written, which causes me to distrust it.

As a happy Immich self-hoster, I'm not excited by the idea of switching to a fork written by folks who can't even be bothered to write their "why this fork exists" explanation themselves. It inspires very low confidence both in the quality of the many additions (because of the vibecoding) and the long-term sustainability of the project (because of the lack of any effort, and because vibe-coded one-offs tend to die faster than labors of love).

Buried at the very bottom of the wall of slop text on their "why our fork" page is this very last "FAQ" question:

>Why fork at all instead of upstreaming features?

>Several Gallery-exclusive features (Shared Spaces, Pet Detection, contextual filters) were either declined upstream, considered out of scope, or required architectural changes that wouldn't have fit Immich's roadmap. Forking lets us experiment without slowing down the upstream team — and rebasing means we never lose touch with their progress.

There's no mention there of "our vibe-coded implementations of these features were declined by upstream because we vibecoded them"; instead, they frame it as "upstream doesn't want these features for their users", with a dash of "upstream has made bad design decisions" (particularly the note about how upstream Immich "required architectural changes").

That's more than a little disingenuous on "Noodle Gallery's" part.