On July 30, 2026 1:31:17 AM EDT, Eli Zaretskii <[email protected]> wrote: >> Date: Wed, 29 Jul 2026 16:22:18 -0400 >> From: Daniel Colascione <[email protected]> >> >> An LLM would be the perfect tool for making changelog commits, BTW. I *hate* >> the things and over the years, I've kept a change local instead of bothering >> to itemize in a commit message all the changes git already records that I've >> done. >> >> Yet even this use of LLMs, which is just tedium , not skill, and which >> (IANAL) has about as much copyright hook as a phone book (see Feist v Rural >> Telephone) is prohibited. It's hard to interpret this prohibition as rooted >> in practical considerations. > >It is not prohibited. If you interpreted this incident as a >prohibition, that is a misunderstanding. I apologize if my wording >somehow caused that. > >The problem was not with the fact that the commit log message was >generated with LLM assistance, the problem was in the Co-Authored-By >heading as part of the log message, which could have been interpreted >as meaning that the _code_ changes were produced with LLM assistance. >We removed the original commit to avoid this confusion. > >The commit log messages have no legal significance (e.g., we modify >the log messages as submitted by some contributors without changing >the attribution, which does have legal significance). Thus, the >(temporary) prohibition on using LLM-assisted contributions in the >project does not include commit log messages, as it doesn't include >any other text posted to this and other Emacs mailing lists. It only >affects contributions of code and project documentation (the one that >goes to manuals and doc strings).
Thank you for the clarification. --- via emacs-tangents mailing list (https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/emacs-tangents)
