> > Clearly, the side that wants to do something different should fork, > right? >
Who is doing something different though, I guess that might be seen by both sides? The "others" want to use LLMs vs. The "others" want to impose additional restrictions? Ultimately though I don't think it matters much. The ones with the keys to gitlab.haskell.org will ultimately decide. That I believe are currently the core maintainers. What this discussion ultimately does is shed some light onto the different standpoints and viewpoints. The decision lies ultimately with those who control the canonical assets. Well, if the differences concern topics not directly associated with the > project at hand, then they might not be a problem. However, if the > differences directly concern the development of the software, then there > might be less of that shared interest of the people. > Granted, if there are concerns that lie on the extreme edges, we won't be able to bridge those differences. Permitting unrestricted autonomous machine contributions, or enforcing a guaranteed no llm involvement standpoint. Generally though, we'd try to work out a compromise that the majority of the contributors to the project can agree on. Again, the ones with the keys ultimately wield the power to make the final decision. Best, Moritz
_______________________________________________ ghc-devs mailing list -- [email protected] To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
