[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Thoughts about LLM usage



On Tue, Aug 11, 2026 at 07:49:23PM -0600, Gunnar Wolf wrote:
FWIW I agree with you using an LLM to prepare an NMU — and then
_double-checking a full diff_, and becoming _personally_ responsible for
any breakage it introduces.

I'd like to know what it means for you to be "personally responsible". I have broken key packages more than once without using an LLM, would I face other consequences if I broke key packagees with an LLM assisted contribution, any if yes, why?

We should be able to use whatever tools we can, but whatever goes in the
distribution signed by gwolf@debian.org is _my sole responsibility_, and I
cannot point fingers at any LLM for doing something wrong.

That's, in my opinion, how Debian works today. Even when I sponsor a package from a newcomer, I take some responsibility for that, and that's the reason why I don't enjoy sponsoring packages that don't use Salsa CI.

Greetings
Marc

--
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Marc Haber         | "I don't trust Computers. They | Mailadresse im Header
Leimen, Germany    |  lose things."    Winona Ryder | Fon: *49 6224 1600402
Nordisch by Nature |  How to make an American Quilt | Fax: *49 6224 1600421


Reply to: