https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2501291
--- Comment #3 from Ben Beasley <[email protected]> --- Gonza, please don’t do what you have done here. Allowing an LLM to embellish the output of fedora-review, a flawed but useful tool, does not add information or make it a complete review. It only adds words. What’s worse is that the LLM has inflated the spurious diagnostics from fedora-review into full-fledged falsehoods. To wit: - The LLM has mischaracterized the fact that licensecheck can’t detect license information separately in every single source file as a license mismatch. Licensecheck is only a tool and a heuristic anyway, and it does make mistakes. Particularly, it can’t distinguish between referencing a license and applying one (e.g. “this package is a non-copyleft alternative to the GPLv3-licensed foolib” is not a GPLv3 license). This situation is even simpler: licensecheck not detecting a license at all in a particular source file is normal, and it generally means that the source is implicitly covered by the package’s “main” license. - The claim about directory ownership is a long-standing false positive, https://pagure.io/FedoraReview/issue/515, that continues to pop up from time to time, and which applies to all Python packages. These directories are owned by python3-libs, which is dependency of python3-rfc3987-syntax2 via “python(abi)”. A wall of blustery LLM output with no real understanding behind it does not constitute a package review. If LLMs could help with package reviews at all, they would need to do so by operating on at least the package sources and the binary RPMs as inputs, not by taking the output of fedora-review on faith and trying to explain it. When I was a new contributor, I would have been deeply dispirited to receive this kind of impersonal and incorrect pseudo-review. Package review is a bottleneck in Fedora, but it’s one of the most important places we can work toward raising package quality across the distribution, and one of the best venues for mentoring and sharing knowledge. It should not be treated like one of those retail “customer service” systems that are designed to get people to go away with the least possible human interaction. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug. You are always notified about changes to this product and component https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=2501291 Report this comment as SPAM: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/enter_bug.cgi?product=Bugzilla&format=report-spam&short_desc=Report%20of%20Bug%202501291%23c3 -- _______________________________________________ package-review mailing list -- [email protected] To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected] Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/[email protected] Do not reply to spam, report it: https://forge.fedoraproject.org/infra/tickets/issues/new
