Re: GR: Ban LLM contributions from Debian

Lucas Nussbaum <[email protected]> Thu, 23 Jul 2026 09:18:16 +0200

Newsgroups	gmane.linux.debian.devel.vote
Message-ID	<[email protected]>

Hi,

On 22/07/26 at 19:30 +0200, Pierre-Elliott Bécue wrote:
> Hello,
> 
> I'd like to offer a ballot option for this GR. It's inspired by the
> Linux AI assistant policy. I'm very open to comments and rewrites.
> 
> I'm not sure I want this GR to be implemented in a founding document, so
> for now, unlike Matthias's proposal, I'd like my ballot option to stand
> on its own rather than modifying a document whose future updates would
> require a 3:1 majority.

While I would vote this ballot option above FD, I think I prefer the one
I proposed because I think that a GR should focus on discussing the
general policy/spirit, not implementation details that can be fleshed
out later once the general policy is decided.

Specifically:

>    + all Signed-off-by tags and GPG signatures on anything submitted to
>      Debian infrastructure (package, commit, mail, …) have been produced
>      by the submitter, not by an AI assistant;
>    + commits have been pushed and packages uploaded by the submitter,
>      not by an AI assistant.

This adds arbitrary restrictions to personal workflows. What is the
problem with asking a local agent to commit and push to a branch (so
that it can later fetch and analyze salsa CI results)?

>  - Work assisted by a generative AI agent or tool must be marked as such
>    with an "Assisted-by: AGENT:MODEL:VERSION[:TOOL]" trailer in the
>    appropriate place (commit message, changelog, …). Some lightweight
>    generative tools, such as tab-completion in Copilot, may be used
>    without the contributor realising they rely on generative AI models;
>    we therefore trust submitters to assess when this rule applies. When
>    in doubt, add the trailer.

I don't think that this level of detail should be specified in a GR.

Lucas

signature.asc (application/pgp-signature, 833 B)