Lucas Nussbaum writes ("Re: GR: Ban LLM contributions from Debian"):
> So, combined with (4) and (5), I understand that "We request" here means
> something similar to "We recommend" or "We strongly advise", not "It is
> required". Maybe it would be clearer to title that part
> "RECOMMENDATIONS", and use "strongly recommend" instead of "request" in
> 1, 2, 3?"Recommend" (and "advice") have very different meaning to "request". I think "request" is clear that whether to do as requested is optional. > Shouldn't you add commit messages here? Especially since they are a > starting point for discussions, for example in code reviews. I would love to. However, unfortuantely the authorship and intended audience for commit messages is quite different and much broader than that of Debian-specific communications. Commit messages are, essentially, code. We share them with our upstreams in both directions. I deliberately left code out of my prohibition because (1) it leads to a double standard for Debian-authored versus upstream code (which would be fine by me but leads obviously to accusations of lack of principle) and (2) it would lead to logic-chopping and fake-hat-switching, where maintainers would claim their commits were not written as part of Debian but then merely imported. Ian. -- Ian Jackson <[email protected]> These opinions are my own. Pronouns: they/he. If I emailed you from @fyvzl.net or @evade.org.uk, that is a private address which bypasses my fierce spamfilter.
