Andreas Enge <[email protected]> writes: > If we decide that this is a problematic precedent, we shoul revert the > commit, and either remove the package in question as an input or rewrite > it from scratch. > > Andreas
Even though atomspace-storage should be rewritten from scratch soon (I will try), this is relatively benign. The packaging of a tool for use with AI was partially written by AI and is slightly more convoluted than necessary (I think). Divya Ranjan Pattanaik writes: > Thank you for clearing that up, Janeke. RMS has already stated it in > gnu-prog-discuss that there will be a policy eventually and until then > we should not add LLM generated code ourselves. What RMS says should count something for GNU Guix. But we should not just remove a package against our deprecation policy. Regards, Florian
