Hi, On 2026-10-28 at 01:49+01:00, Simon Tournier wrote: > Moreover, please note the variant of [...] to add the label (tag) > “kind/gen-ai-suspect“. Maybe it could just be “package-ai-suspect”? > > All in all, concretely we could agree on a rule like: > > 1. A reviewer marks as “package-ai-suspect“ a package contribution that > looks suspicious. > 2. The reviewer pings another committer for an opinion. > 3. If the suspicion is confirmed by 2 people, then the package > contribution is rejected with a pre-formatted message. > 4. If no one provides a second opinion, then after 3 months the > package contribution is closed. > > WDYT?
I think the suspicion tag is quite rude, if it turns out to be a false positive. I suggest a new-packages team that get pinged on package additions so people who care to join the team can be notified and block it under their suspicion, which is confirmed by inquiring the contributor or upstream. This also means new packages must wait a standard period (1 week? 2?) before being merged even after approval(s). Don't ask me how I imagine this to work for the cargo cult^W^W Rust crates /-; Kind regards, Phong
