Ludovic Courtès <[email protected]> writes: > 1. The project (defined as maintainers, team members, and anyone with > write access to a Guix repository, including Weblate, or to Guix > resources such as the build farm) **will not use > genAI** to author code or packages, to interact with other > participants (e.g., to explain code changes or to review code), to > produce artwork, translations, or any other artifact.
> There’s “no blanket pledging not using any of the LLM tools”. On the > contrary, we have change the wording not only to allow for some uses, > but to explicitly list exploratory analysis and non-legally-significant > contributions as accepted uses. >[…] > The commitments set a general direction for the project. > > The policy determines what contributions are acceptable. > I don’t understand what is allowed for whom. I feel I need a flowchart. And will I need to remove Chinese GPT4o translations even though they are not used until review because of the fuzzy mark? Either way, Weblate users have write access to guix/translations repo without agreeing to any commitments. Please make that clearer. > Exactly, that’s why I explained earlier that I would not want such a > tag. I suggested something like ‘LLM-Assistance: debugging’, but I > think just a plain text description is fine. We can always improve on > that later if we feel a need for it. An ‘LLM-Assistance: debugging’ would be more clear. > Earlier several people, such as Greg Hogan, suggested that exploratory > analysis be explicitly listed as acceptable genAI use. ISTM Greg Hogan maybe among other reasons had disapproved https://consensus.guix.gnu.org/gcd/007-teams-special-teams-and-memberships.html because of a confusing GCD after confusing discussions. Regards, Florian [1] Greg’s explanation of GCD007 disapproval https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/guix-devel/2026-05/msg00048.html
