Clint Adams <clint@debian.org> writes: > On Wed, May 07, 2025 at 06:10:37PM +0200, Simon Josefsson wrote: >>That is not my preference nor what I would want to see happen, but I >>think it is consistent with how Debian approach including non-free >>firmware in the official installer images, and how Debian approaches >>licensing on other non-source files inside packages. > > So what is your preference and what would you want to see happen? > I ask because I see no good options here. I am thinking about > this from the perspective of a user who wants to use the models > unmodified and from the perspective of a user who wants to > modify the models to work better with a face that the models > "consider" an outlier. I think Thorsten Glaser's proposal on the surface looks more in line with what I would want to see, but I don't think we understand the full implications of any of the proposals right now. https://lists.debian.org/debian-vote/2025/04/msg00118.html Some approach to have LLM tools in 'main' when they can work with models that would be appropriate for inclusion in 'main' seems fine to me. Then we can ship models for that tool in 'non-free', for people who want to work with some larger model. I don't see a need to permit LLM tools in 'main' that are unable to work with any libre LLM model, those tools could go into 'contrib'. /Simon
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature