>>>>> On Tue, 10 Mar 2026, Filip Kobierski wrote: > Maybe one could flag slop packages with a LICENSE variable that is not > accepted by default? > That would allow users to still have the final say in what can run on > their Gentoo systems but would be aware that AI-SLOP license is > suboptimal.
Not sure if LICENSE would be the right tool for this. AI generated code certainly touches legal aspects, but I think these are not at the core of the issue. Maybe these packages could masked in a special profile? Or (if we want the information in the ebuild itself) introduce a new PROPERTIES or RESTRICT token? > Then I imagine the problem would be in marking packages as such... Unfortunately, this problem exists regardless of the technical implementation that we would choose. Ulrich
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
