On 2026-05-26 at 11:01+02:00, Hugo Buddelmeijer wrote: > On 5/26/26 03:19, pelzflorian (Florian Pelz) wrote: > > Don't talk about use of LLMs. Writings by LLM are a problem, > > not use. Hints given by consulting LLM on packages code cannot be, > > since according to c't magazine, all the Web search engines > > internally used language models for query interpretation > > since a long time ago. > > Half of the argumentation is that using genAI is bad > for the environment and is enabling fascism. It does not matter > that the genAI is hidden behind a search engine > for those arguments to matter.
I wholely agree with the sentiment here. It should not be within the scope of Guix contribution guidelines to dictate how a contribution is done, but only what contributions it accepts. It is indeed important to have a policy in place though, because it might not be obvious to all contributors that piping LLM into one's editor may result in low-quality contributions or copyright infringements, and that Guix is not open to such risks. The same for reviews. It might be a cutural clash but I also find the GCD's title and framing distasteful and the opposite of its disclaimer: > This pledge is *not* about claiming a "moral superiority" > of the project and its members for not resorting to genAI, > nor is it about "virtue signaling".
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
