Re: GR: Ban LLM contributions from Debian

On Thu, 23 Jul 2026 13:18, Ansgar 🙀 <[email protected]> wrote:
>Hi,
>
>On Wed, 2026-07-22 at 17:35 +0200, Matthias Geiger wrote:
>> he scope of this GR is (non-exhaustive): 
>> - Debian source packages
>> - Official Debian project software, such as lintian
>
>So if, say, lintian was no longer "official Debian project software",
>this would not be a problem?
>
It is hard to define what official project software is and what not. Is 
dose3 official? By my definition I mean: Anything that is developed 
primary for use with Debian, very often by DDs themselves.
We can't enforce rules for upstream projects, but we can do so for 
primarily debian-native software developed by us.
>> It does not include: - Upstream projects using LLMs for development
>
>But you explicitly say below that "Debian Policy and the DFSG require
>absolute clarity for licensing and copyright". Do you say this is the
>case for LLM output?
>
>You say there should be no special exception, so please make explicit
>whether upstream projects no longer require "absolute clarity for
>licensing and copyright" or that requirement is fulfilled for LLM
>output.
>
Well, in my book any NEW package that used LLM contribtions does not 
meet the DFSG; this is different for packages already in the archive 
such as the kernel where we just can't go and rip out the source code in 
question.
>> Though our position is that LLM contributions are contrary to 
>> documents already ratified by Debian, in order to remove all doubt, 
>> we propose the following addition to the Social Contract: 
>> 
>> 6. Works Created through the use of Large Language Models (LLMs)
>>     We will not allow direct contributions to Debian written with the use or assistance
>>     of large language models (LLMs) or other generative AI tools. Direct contributions are
>>     defined as packaging, native Debian software like lintian, documentation and translations
>>     written by Debian contributors, and official Debian web resources, etc. Other categories
>>     such as upstream projects written with LLM assistance may be included at a later date. 
>>     This ensures that Debian remains a stable, trusted, and reliable operating
>>     system, and protects the interests of the Debian volunteers who make it possible.
>
>So there are now special exceptions for contributions to Debian vs.
>contributions to Debian via upstream projects?
>
>As patches are part of the packaging, I guess backporting security
>fixes from upstream will be forbidden? Or will there be an exception
>for this? If yes, please include it.
>
Done so in the updated version.
>Are backports of feature patches also allowed? Or will there be no
>exception for those?
>
>How will you handle existing LLM contributions? Remove everything? Or
>are only new contributions problematic?
>
As stated above, existing code replacement is always problematic, thus 
this would only affect new contributions from when it'd be in effect.

best,