Thank you. I found it very helpful. Saved me running similar queries or spending a couple of hours of my time assembling the same info. The only nitpick is that when ordered in progressive order, the neutral option gets ordered in the most progressive spot, instead of in the middle.
I don't get the argument that providing such information is "in bad taste". People (in general) can and do get offended by all kinds of things being said and even about things being unsaid and by who says those things. We, as a community, do not have to *automatically* accommodate our behaviour to all individual opinions. There is a step *first* where there is a community consensus on whether the offence is reasonable or not, implicitly or explicitly. The AI disclosure was clear and up-front, if there is *any* way to a consensus discussion here, this is the example of a polite and reasoned approach. IMHO people categorically refusing to even look at any AI-contaminated content are being unreasonable and seem to also be unwilling to engage in any constructive discussion or in seeking common ground. And this was not even that - the mailing list message contained no AI generated content, only a link to a, clearly labelled, AI generated page. If even that is to be seen as unacceptable, then I do not see any constructive communication on this topic going forward. On Wed, 29 Jul 2026 at 20:50, Lucas Nussbaum <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi, > > With the assistance of AI, I created a table that summarizes the current > options (including Tobias' because I assume it will get enough seconds): > > https://people.debian.org/~lucas/gr-2026-002/comparison.html > > There's a "progressive order" button that can make it easier to read. > You can also reorder columns manually. > > The corresponding prompt is > https://people.debian.org/~lucas/gr-2026-002/SPEC.md > > Feedback welcomed (ideally, as patches to SPEC.md) > > Lucas > > -- Best regards, Aigars Mahinovs
