gregor herrmann dijo [Tue, Oct 27, 2026 at 04:39:44AM +0100]:
|This is an LLM based review using a Debian Inference based workflow. It was |not written by a member of the DFSG team and has not been checked by one. It |is not a decision on the package: it may be wrong, and it may have missed |things.I do not object in principle to the use of a LLM, but the DFSG team needs to take full responsibility for its output: this kind of disclaimer is not acceptable.Same here: I don't object to the DFSG team experimenting with LLMs for package reviews but dumping them without any human inspections onto uploaders seems both disrespectful and contrary to the GR result to me.
I concur with this feeling that I've seen repeated throughout the thread. I will not hide that I am an LLM user for several bits of my work, and I disclosed with my vote in the GR¹ that I am not against using LLM output for work for Debian. However, I do not think auto-generating a non-human-mediated LLM response and sending it to any uploader is just wrong. ¹ https://gwolf.org/2026/08/as-far-as-llms-go-in-debian-i-think-that-936241857.html My veeling is that the DFSG team are free and welcome to integrate LLMs into their workflow, but whatever output they share with fellow developers should be first and foremost reviewed by the team, and only later communicated to the uploader. I feel many people will ignore and dismiss the output, if not by creating a filter to do it automatically, just by not paying attention to a wall of text that reflects nobody's opinion. Please do consider changing this tool's behavior, — Gunnar.
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
