>mar. 27 oct. 2026 at 17:31, Ludovic Courtès <[email protected]> wrote:
> Sorry I didn’t mean to bring the discussion in that direction. My > question is more what to do first about packages with vibe-coded > software, and then more generally to avoid indefinite growth—but the > latter is a more difficult topic that we should probably keep for > another day. I agree; packaging of vibe coded projects is becoming a subject, both with respect to newly created as well as with existing projects switching to a vibe coding strategies, who knows why. To me, both should be rejected/removed, following a reasonable period of time on how the project evolves, as it lacks to be considered as free software. This should become a policy, similarly and as an extension to dd3fa6231f1, and for exactly the same reasons. This is the sad situation where abuse of LLMs brings us today. C.
