Simon Tournier <[email protected]> writes: > Hi Ludo, > > On Wed, 17 Jun 2026 at 17:36, Ludovic Courtès <[email protected]> wrote: > >> 1. The project (defined as maintainers, team members, and anyone with >> write access to a Guix repository, including Weblate, or to Guix >> resources such as the build farm) **will not use nor encourage use >> of genAI** to author code or packages, to review code, to produce >> artwork, >> translations, or any other artifacts. >> >> Does this address your concern? > > Not fully mine. :-) > > When authoring, if I **use** GenAI to know more about some patterns, for > example the GenAi output is: > > (add-before 'build 'patch-manifest.in > (lambda _ > (call-with-output-file "MANIFEST.in" > (lambda (port) > (when (file-exists? "MANIFEST.in") > ;; append the new line to existing file > (call-with-input-file "MANIFEST.in" > (lambda (in) > (dump-port in port)))) > (format port "include extra-file.txt~%")))))))) > > Then my final submission is: > > (add-before 'check 'patch-potfiles.skip > (lambda _ > (let ((file "po/POTFILES.skip")) > (with-output-to-file file > (lambda () > (display "lxsession-default-apps/combobox.c\n") > (display "lxsession-default-apps/main.c\n") > (display "data/lxpolkit.desktop.in\n") > (display "lxpolkit/main.c\n") > (display "lxsession/app.c\n")))) > #t))))) > > The question is thus: Do I breach my pledge? > > My understanding of the current wording is yes I breach my pledge > because I **use** GenAI to author code. And I’ll not pledge that > because I do whatever I want on my side for authoring code while the > outcome is crystal clear. > > If you answer no it isn’t a breach, then there is an issue about the > wording because we do not understand the same thing. > > >> If not, what change would make it acceptable to you? And what would be >> ideal to you? (The two answers may differ.) > > Instead, I propose this wording: > > --8<---------------cut here---------------start------------->8--- > 1. The project (defined as maintainers, team members, and anyone with write > access to a Guix repository, including Weblate, or to Guix resources such > as the build farm) *will not use or encourage use of genAI*. Namely, the > use of genAI means *not simply pasting* answers, code or packages, code > reviews, artwork, translations or comments generated by genAI *without > proper review using human own input*. > --8<---------------cut here---------------end--------------->8--- > > It appears to me much better because it clarifies what means “use” in > this context.
I think once you start looking at this pragmatically, the entire GCD falls apart because it isn't intended to be pragmatic. It claims to not be about morals and virtues but there is a large chunk of the motivation section written around such topics. There have been very good pragmatic responses on the Codeberg discussion that address this. The elephant in the room will continue to be that an experienced programmer who chooses to use LLMs will be able to review and hand edit (some may view this as obfuscation) changes that were generated by an LLM into a high-quality PR/patch done in a time efficient manner. Who authored this type of change? I suppose the answer will come down to "the lawyers haven't figured it out yet". It's just a pity that the Guix maintainers and seasoned contributors, who have the opportunity to use LLMs now (until individuals are priced out of using them), can efficiently provide high quality contributions to improve project and continue its growth. Trevor
