On Monday, November 9, 2026 11:16:57 AM Mountain Standard Time Richard Laager wrote: > If Debian had a team of CompSci student volunteers do first-round NEW > queue review, and they had the same accuracy level and sent the same > emails, would that be a problem? I suspect not, even though their output > would also be "mostly-correct". > > What if the emails were simply the output of lintian and other > deterministic copyright analysis tools, would that be a problem? If the > team had done that without discussion first, I would have been > incredibly shocked if it received the same negative response. Nor would > I personally have expected them to have to discuss that in advance. It's > not mass bug filing where the consequences of a wrong decision impose a > large cost on a bunch of people at once. Sure, it might affect everyone > _at some point_, but tweaks can be made to the process over time. > > If those are not a problem, then the issue isn't the output or people > getting emails they didn't ask for, it's simply that it was generated by > an LLM. We voted on this and the decision was made; LLMs are acceptable.
I agree with Richard on the above. While do I think the DFSG team should have announced their intentions on the mailing list in advance (I think it is courteous for every major change in core Debian processes to be announced and explained, in advance if possible), I don’t see any other concerns beyond some people not liking LLMs no matter how accurate the output is or how helpful the tool. -- Soren Stoutner [email protected]
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
