Hi Greg, Greg Hogan <[email protected]> skribis:
>> I will assume that "will not use genAi" here is referring to Item >> 1 under Project Commitments. Please note that there are important >> qualifications after your selective quote. >> >> Prior discussion of the interaction between Project Committments >> and Policy for Contributions has focused on the first two policy >> items. If you feel that policy Item 4 (Exploratory analysis) is >> also in confict, the considerate move would have been to offer >> constructive feedback to the author directly - and it's not too >> late to do so. >> >> As for Items 1 and 2 of Policy for Contributions: clearer wording >> has been proposed [1], and the author has expressed support for it >> [2], but you did not [3], [4]. As best I can tell, your objections >> had nothing to do with clarity, but were because the clarified >> text didn't match your preferred interpretation. > > My objection was that your wording did not match the author's stated > interpretation. “The author” (you can call me by my name) explicitly said they were fine with the text Jason proposed. Please don’t speak for myself; when I say I’m fine with the proposed text, I really am. Suggesting otherwise is disrespectful. So, yes or no, do you want me to install the changes proposed in <https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/guix-devel/2026-07/msg00033.html>? If the answer is “no”, what is your concrete proposal (as a patch)? I’m happy to leave you 24h to think though this if that can make the GCD acceptable to you. Thanks, Ludo’.
