Hello Lucas, Thanks for adding this ballot. I have a question and a few comments if you don't mind.
[...] > > 4. **Explicit Disclosure:** When a significant portion of the contribution > is taken from a tool without manual modification, contributors should > disclose the tool's use. This may be recorded using Git trailers, such as > `Generated-By:` or `Assisted-By:`. I'd avoid proposing the tool here. I fear our commits will be infected by badly intended promotion of this or that tool. Perhaps you could rephrase it a bit to encourage the disclosure of AI usage, without mentioning the tool behind it specifically? > 5. **Prior Discussion of Bulk or Automated Changes:** Similarly to the > mass-bug filing process (Developers Reference section 7.1.1), > contributors should discuss their intention before submitting bulk or > autonomously generated contributions. Any such automated process should > be overseen by a human who remains accountable for its behavior and > output. > > 6. **Community Courtesy:** To respect the preferences of project members who > wish to avoid AI-generated content, contributors should clearly label > such content in mailing list and bug discussions (e.g., by identifying > such content with a clear disclaimer or a machine-readable tag like > `[AI-Generated]`). My feeling is that the above will legitimise the use of 'AI-generated' content in your mailing lists and the BTS. Experience has shown that this usually triggers a wave of negative reactions that I'd rather avoid. I'd actually argue for merging 4 and 6 by making it clear that AI-generated or heavily assisted content is never accepted in Debian without disclosure, without enforcing any specific means or mentioning any specific areas (mailing lists, bts, salsa, etc.) where this should be applied. > 7. **Confidentiality and Privacy:** Contributors must not use generative AI > tools that transmit data to untrusted providers with non-public or > sensitive project information (such as embargoed security reports or > private communication), as this may lead to the unintended disclosure of > confidential data. By 'untrusted providers' do you mean anything != *.d.o ? Shouldn't it be more clear? Bests, -- Tiago Bortoletto Vaz
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
