On Sat, Oct 26, 2024 at 10:41:12AM -0700, Mo Zhou wrote: > I drafted an unofficial document named ML-Policy[5] > > [5]: https://salsa.debian.org/deeplearning-team/ml-policy/-/blob/master/ML-Policy.rst [...] > Maybe it is time for us to build a consensus on how we tell whether a > piece of AI is DFSG-compliant or not, instead of waiting for > ftp-masters to interpret those binary blobs case-by-case. > > Do we need a GR to reach a consensus? A vote is not a good tool to build consensus (quite the contrary), but it could be an effective decision-making tool. Before getting in to that procedural question, though, do you (or anyone) know what ftpmasters think of the ML-Policy? Because if, say, they agree with it, it would be enough for them to adopt/endorse that policy to turn it into the an official Debian policy on this matter. (In case of doubt: mine is a real question, I have no idea what fptmasters think about this matter. It just seems important to me to find that out, before considering a GR that overlaps with ftpmasters' delegated responsibilities.) Cheers -- Stefano Zacchiroli . zack@upsilon.cc . https://upsilon.cc/zack _. ^ ._ Full professor of Computer Science o o o \/|V|\/ Télécom Paris, Polytechnic Institute of Paris o o o </> <\> Co-founder & CSO Software Heritage o o o o /\|^|/\ Mastodon: https://mastodon.xyz/@zacchiro '" V "'
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature