On 23/07/26 at 09:26 +0200, Pierre-Elliott Bécue wrote: > De : Lucas Nussbaum <[email protected]> > >> + all Signed-off-by tags and GPG signatures on anything submitted to > >> Debian infrastructure (package, commit, mail, …) have been produced > >> by the submitter, not by an AI assistant; > >> + commits have been pushed and packages uploaded by the submitter, > >> not by an AI assistant. > > > > This adds arbitrary restrictions to personal workflows. What is the > > problem with asking a local agent to commit and push to a branch (so > > that it can later fetch and analyze salsa CI results)? > > I don't consider reasonable to allow an LLM to push on a repo from which work > can be extracted into a distro used by millions and core to a big chunk of > the world ecosystem. > > You are of course entitled to a different opinion.
Removing AI from the equation: If I push some work-in-progress, experimental code to a branch just to see how it would go through CI, and someone else decides to extract that crappy code from my branch and ship it, I think the problem is with someone else, not me. I think that "The submitter is solely responsible for the submitted work" is sufficient in that case: I would be solely responsible for pushing WIP stuff to a branch (and that's fine), and someone else would be solely responsible for deciding that that code should be shipped. Also, when you write: > I don't consider reasonable to allow an LLM to push on a repo This is not what happens in practice. What happens in practice is that the LLM instructs a local agent (e.g. OpenCode) to execute a tool (such as 'in a shell, run git push'). The local agent may ask the user for explicit confirmation. The user of the local agent could also configure it so that it does not have access to required credentials (typically isolating it with bubblewrap). If developers fail to ensure that the tools they use don't do crap, I think it's on them. (Also, that's why I write "AI" and not just "LLM". I think that the set of technologies we should consider in this discussion is not limited to the model itself, but also includes local agents and possibly other tools such as MCP servers.) Lucas
