Re: LLM Commit in upstream `master`?!

Stefan Monnier via "Emacs development discussions."
<[email protected]> writes:

> I can't count how many times I've lectured package maintainers not to
> force push on public branches unless it's a really
> exceptional circumstance, and now I see that without even 24h of
> discussion we've force-pushed because of some tiny bit of LLM infused
> commit message which may potentially in some possible future cause some
> hypothetical concern around the copyright on that commit message?
>
> To me, this act falls squarely into the "bat shit crazy" category.
>
> I know Emacs maintainers are not crazy at all, so I'll file the whole
> event under "blunders", but I have to speak up and say this was a very
> bad decision.  I don't use LLMs and keep praying that all the AI data
> centers burn up in flames, but can we stop about this LLM paranoia?
> LLMs cause enough real immediate problems that we don't need any
> extra paranoia.
>
> Yuan made a mistake because he misunderstood the policy, we learn, we
> `git revert`, and we move on.  Force pushes are not for mere worries.

+1.

Only now, reading the mail accumulated in my inbox, have I learned why
the automated system producing Android packages failed four weeks ago.