On 2026-03-25, at 14:37, Jean Louis <[email protected]> wrote: > * Ihor Radchenko <[email protected]> [2026-03-25 09:29]: >> Also, I think I need to be clear here - we do not currently suffer from >> high inflow of LLM-generated patches, unlike some other projects. >> From my perspective, beyond aligning with GNU policy, we should simply >> make sure that our contributor community keeps being healthy. That >> involves addressing both concerns about LLMs from some community >> members, as well as not alienating LLM users (who are only growing in >> numbers, including some prominent community members, like John Wiegley). > > Future people will be saying like this: > --------------------------------------- > > The old mailing list was unwelcoming and exhausting. Simple questions > met with cryptic cynicism, conversations wandered off-topic, and > getting help felt like a draining battle rather than collaboration. > > Today, instead of navigating harsh conversations with strangers who > might or might not help, I simply ask a local LLM and get a clear > answer instantly. The struggle of dealing with unknown people is gone, > replaced by a tool that is patient, direct, and always available.
That's an interesting, but also sad and a bit scary take. I find the list the opposite of "unwelcoming and exhausting". The ability to connect to _real people_ (even if only via a mailing list) is something an LLM cannot and will not replace. Don't get me wrong - I use LLMs every day now, and "pair-programming" with a machine is a great experience - but this is something else. Just my 3 cents -- Marcin Borkowski https://mbork.pl
