On Mon, 2026-11-09 at 12:47 +0100, Matthias Geiger wrote: > Thanks for acknowledging that. I think the main reason people (myself) > are angry, is that (mostly) three points: > > 1) Not making the mails explicitly opt-out in the first place. > This is just hostile IMO. Most already get >20 mails/day, and this just > adds to that. Just externalizing a mostly-correct generated text dump on > maintainers feels highly disrespectful. Even if someone wanted to > receive the mails, they should have to explicitly enable them.
and number 1 could've been avoided by doing 2 and 3 i.e. a discussion of auto-emailing LLM reviews before implementing it would've allowed adding this opt-out and to address other issues people had with this feature much earlier. > 2) Neither announcing this, nor having prior discussion. > This is probably what angers me the most. We have all those guidelines > (GR, policy, Code of Conduct, DFSG) that we expect all contributors to > follow. > For such a large-scale change to just be enabled silently over night > equates an absolute absence of transparency. > > While the social contract does only mention bugs (ยง3, we will not hide > problems), this has the same ring to it. > I always assumed "just doing" things, especially with such a broad > impact on the project, was not the Debian way and how we do things. This > leaves a rather poor impression of secrecy in the DFSG team for me. > > Every other (technical) change in Debian, like the recent removal of > WebKitGTK for BE was announced, then discussed. Whether one likes this > or not, it is the established process. Except this wasn't done here. > > 3) Directly contradicting with the GR outcome > > As Ian and Maytham already pointed out, this a direct violation of the > GR. It is a large-scale change, that was neither discussed, nor was > consensus sought, nor announced. It just was there one day. > > I would expect at the very least that the DFSG team puts this on hold, > disables the mails from the LLM, and has a discussion on -project. > > Otherwise, what good is the GR if it is factually ignored ? -- Maytham
