Am So 02.08.2026 21:28 schrieb Moritz Angermann: > > 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”?
I think it’s not so difficult to see who wants to do something different here. The “anti-LLM” people want to develop GHC as it was developed in the past; the “pro-LLM” people want to develop it in a different way. The restrictions that the “anti-LLM” people want to impose aren’t “additional”, given that they would only preserve the previous way of development: they’d just rule out a fundamentally different way of development, which hadn’t been explicitly ruled out previously only because it didn’t exist. > Ultimately though I don’t think it matters much. The ones with the > keys to gitlab.haskell.org will ultimately decide. I’ve been wondering repeatedly who will ultimately decide. Of course, the ones with the keys to the GitLab server can enforce any way of development that someone decided for; so in particular they can enforce what they decided for themselves. However, will they do this? I don’t think they will, but rather they’ll try to implement a decision that “pleases the community”. Which apparently doesn’t exist. In fact, what I’ve been seeing is that no decision has been made for quite some time. There’s only this ongoing discussion, whose only result regarding the AI policy proposal seems to be that it has been shifted towards the LLM side. All the best, Wolfgang _______________________________________________ ghc-devs mailing list -- [email protected] To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
