Re: Dealing with (potential) slop packages

Hello guys,

what if there could be a new section called package.origin

where you specify which types of packages you would like to install

- human-made
- machine-made (vibe-coded let's say)
- human-aided-by-machine etc. (a mix in between)

But probably human-made and human-aided-by-machine could intersect 
somehow as it more common to have at least code generation in the editor 
these days.

The user could probably select one or multiple category to apply for so 
that will be sure to use only these the types of packages that follow 
that rule.

Maybe it could help?

Kind regards
Antonio G.

On 3/11/26 01:22, Sam James wrote:
> Filip Kobierski <[email protected]> writes:
>
>> Hi Michał,
>>
>> The issue you described is real and widespread.
>>
>> Maybe one could flag slop packages with a LICENSE variable that is not accepted by default?
>> That would allow users to still have the final say in what can run on their Gentoo systems but would be aware that AI-SLOP license is suboptimal.
>> Then I imagine the problem would be in marking packages as such...
> Yes, that's the big job.
>
>> Also the name of the "LICENSE"; AI-SLOP seems in-line with Gentoo's approach, alas I in my opinion is unprofessional. Plain AI does not really sound discouraging. Naming is a secondary issue though.
>>
>> What do you think about that?
> Do you have an alternative proposal?
>
> Also, while I'm not sure how I feel about the name myself: is it really
> unprofessional to call it out, when one may regard the behaviour of such projects as
> grossly unprofessional?
>
> sam