Re: Claude AI code audit of GNUstep core stack — 150 fixes, 12 perf optimizations, all available f or upstream

"[email protected]" via "Developers list for GNUstep, the GNU groupware evironment" <[email protected]> Sat, 18 Jul 2026 10:59:46 +0200
Newsgroups gmane.comp.lib.gnustep.devel
Message-ID <[email protected]>
--Apple-Mail=_8423BD79-69DC-422C-A5DD-F8037E6A1E42
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset=utf-8

Hi Greg,

just one question in this regard: Do we have a voice in GNU=E2=80=99s =
discussion on that topic (I hope, there is a discussion an not just a =
decision by one person, namely RMS)? If so, I hope, we make our =
standpoint clear and don=E2=80=99t go onto a witch-hunt against AI =
(which would be like a witch hunt against compilers and linkers in the =
times when UNIX was still written in assembler). In my opinion AI is =
just a (very sophisticated) tool which you need to know, how to use it =
and its limitations. Then we can use it sanely and to our advantage.

Hoping for the best outcome,

	Lars

> Am 18.07.2026 um 10:23 schrieb Gregory Casamento =
<[email protected]>:
>=20
> David,
>=20
> Sorry for the late reply; work has been very demanding lately.  Of =
course, any policy they issue will apply to us.  I think this is a =
reasonable approach for EMACS if they are waiting for guidance from the =
GNU Project.
>=20
> Until that policy is published, however, I don't think it gives us any =
basis for changing GNUstep's existing approach. Once the GNU Project has =
issued its guidance, we can evaluate it on its merits, determine whether =
and how it applies to GNUstep, and discuss whether any changes are =
warranted.
>=20
> I believe our current policy provides a practical balance as it =
focuses on licensing, provenance, code quality, review, and =
maintainability rather than the specific tools contributors use.
>=20
> As mentioned in previous emails, I have set a clear line on what is =
acceptable, and this was reflected in the discussion a few weeks ago.
>=20
> Yours, GC
>=20
>=20
> On Wed, Jul 15, 2026 at 4:31=E2=80=AFAM David Chisnall =
<[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
>> On 14 Jul 2026, at 22:48, Gregory Casamento <[email protected] =
<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
>> >=20
>> > Based on the discussion, I do not see sufficient consensus or =
justification to replace our existing AI policy with a "No-AI" policy =
for the GNUstep core libraries. Accordingly, the existing policy will =
remain in effect.
>>=20
>> Most of the arguments have been covered in other places and it=E2=80=99=
s quite surprising that most of the folks in this thread seem unfamiliar =
with them, but I would add one thing:
>>=20
>> This week, EMACS paused =E2=80=98AI=E2=80=99 contributions because =
the GNU project is expected to provide an explicit policy soon. I =
presume that policy will apply to GNUstep as well.
>>=20
>> David
>>=20
>=20
>=20
>=20
> --
> Gregory Casamento
> GNUstep Lead Developer / Black Lotus, Principal Consultant
> http://www.gnustep.org <http://www.gnustep.org/> - =
http://heronsperch.blogspot.com <http://heronsperch.blogspot.com/>
> https://www.openhub.net/languages/objective_c


--Apple-Mail=_8423BD79-69DC-422C-A5DD-F8037E6A1E42
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset=utf-8

<html aria-label=3D"message body"><head><meta http-equiv=3D"content-type" =
content=3D"text/html; charset=3Dutf-8"></head><body =
style=3D"overflow-wrap: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; =
line-break: after-white-space;">Hi Greg,<div><br></div><div>just one =
question in this regard: Do we have a voice in GNU=E2=80=99s discussion =
on that topic (I hope, there is a discussion an not just a decision by =
one person, namely RMS)? If so, I hope, we make our standpoint clear and =
don=E2=80=99t go onto a witch-hunt against AI (which would be like a =
witch hunt against compilers and linkers in the times when UNIX was =
still written in assembler). In my opinion AI is just a (very =
sophisticated) tool which you need to know, how to use it and its =
limitations. Then we can use it sanely and to our =
advantage.</div><div><br></div><div>Hoping for the best =
outcome,</div><div><br></div><div><span class=3D"Apple-tab-span" =
style=3D"white-space:pre">	</span>Lars<br =
id=3D"lineBreakAtBeginningOfMessage"><div><br><blockquote =
type=3D"cite"><div>Am 18.07.2026 um 10:23 schrieb Gregory Casamento =
&lt;[email protected]&gt;:</div><br =
class=3D"Apple-interchange-newline"><div><div dir=3D"ltr"><div =
class=3D"gmail_default" style=3D"font-family:monospace,monospace"><p =
class=3D"gmail-isSelectedEnd">David,</p><p =
class=3D"gmail-isSelectedEnd">Sorry for the late reply; work has been =
very demanding lately.&nbsp; Of course, any policy they issue will apply =
to us.&nbsp; I think this is a reasonable approach for EMACS if they are =
waiting for guidance from the GNU Project.</p><p =
class=3D"gmail-isSelectedEnd">Until that policy is published, however, I =
don't think it gives us any basis for changing GNUstep's existing =
approach. Once the GNU Project has issued its guidance, we can evaluate =
it on its merits, determine whether and how it applies to GNUstep, and =
discuss whether any changes are warranted.</p><p =
class=3D"gmail-isSelectedEnd">I believe our current policy provides a =
practical balance as it focuses on licensing, provenance, code quality, =
review, and maintainability rather than the specific tools contributors =
use.</p><p class=3D"gmail-isSelectedEnd">As mentioned in previous =
emails, I have set a clear line on what is acceptable, and this&nbsp;was =
reflected in the discussion a few&nbsp;weeks ago.</p><p>Yours, =
GC</p></div></div><br><div class=3D"gmail_quote =
gmail_quote_container"><div dir=3D"ltr" class=3D"gmail_attr">On Wed, Jul =
15, 2026 at 4:31=E2=80=AFAM David Chisnall &lt;<a =
href=3D"mailto:[email protected]">[email protected]</a>&gt=
; wrote:<br></div><blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0px =
0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid =
rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex">On 14 Jul 2026, at 22:48, Gregory =
Casamento &lt;<a href=3D"mailto:[email protected]" =
target=3D"_blank">[email protected]</a>&gt; wrote:<br>
&gt; <br>
&gt; Based on the discussion, I do not see sufficient consensus or =
justification to replace our existing AI policy with a "No-AI" policy =
for the GNUstep core libraries. Accordingly, the existing policy will =
remain in effect.<br>
<br>
Most of the arguments have been covered in other places and it=E2=80=99s =
quite surprising that most of the folks in this thread seem unfamiliar =
with them, but I would add one thing:<br>
<br>
This week, EMACS paused =E2=80=98AI=E2=80=99 contributions because the =
GNU project is expected to provide an explicit policy soon. I presume =
that policy will apply to GNUstep as well.<br>
<br>
David<br>
<br>
</blockquote></div><div><br clear=3D"all"></div><div><br></div><span =
class=3D"gmail_signature_prefix">-- </span><br><div dir=3D"ltr" =
class=3D"gmail_signature"><div dir=3D"ltr"><div dir=3D"ltr"><div><div =
dir=3D"ltr"><font face=3D"monospace">Gregory Casamento<br>GNUstep Lead =
Developer / Black Lotus, Principal Consultant<br><a =
href=3D"http://www.gnustep.org/" =
target=3D"_blank">http://www.gnustep.org</a> - <a =
href=3D"http://heronsperch.blogspot.com/" =
target=3D"_blank">http://heronsperch.blogspot.com</a><br></font></div></di=
v><div dir=3D"ltr"><font color=3D"#888888" face=3D"monospace"><a =
href=3D"https://www.openhub.net/languages/objective_c" =
style=3D"color:rgb(17,85,204)" =
target=3D"_blank">https://www.openhub.net/languages/objective_c</a></font>=
</div></div></div></div>
</div></blockquote></div><br></div></body></html>=

--Apple-Mail=_8423BD79-69DC-422C-A5DD-F8037E6A1E42--