Home | Notifications | New Note | Local | Federated | Search | Logout

Note Detail

dave@dthompson@toot.cat (2026-09-18 22:31:32)
seems bad that not a single Guix maintainer will weigh in on what they believe the status quo is regarding LLM generated patches nor what they think the policy should be in the future.

---Replies---

David Bremner@bremner@mathstodon.xyz (2026-09-18 22:34:07)
@dthompson Maybe now that guile has made a decision, that gives some push? There is after all some overlap. But yeah, I am waiting to see how things turn out before investing too deeply in Guix.

ArneBab@ArneBab@rollenspiel.social (2026-09-18 23:18:14)
@dthompson who qualifies as maintainer?

I only contribute very infrequently (and I think LLM output should be banned from Guix, because that voids all the reproducibility guarantees).

Parade du Grotesque 💀@ParadeGrotesque@mastodon.sdf.org (2026-09-19 00:53:25)
@dthompson 

You must be new around here, this was addressed on Sept. 9th:

https://toot.aquilenet.fr/@civodul/117242996935349442

dave@dthompson@toot.cat (2026-09-22 20:50:19)
update: looks like Guix is getting a simple non-LLM policy for now while something more comprehensive can be hashed out through the consensus process. that's good!

https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/guix-devel/2026-09/msg00145.html