Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

My takeaway was that they weren't happy about upstreams, but didn't feel like there was anything that could actually be done:

> We can't do much about upstream projects using it.

As a potential upstream, I could potentially help them by adding some kind of metadata to my package, indicating, "Some portions of this code were written with CoPilot active." And this could allow them to automatically filter out and reject packaging requests from users.

(As an open source author, I'm deeply ambivalent about distro packaging anyways. I release my software as pre-built, standalone binaries specifically to avoid the tarpit of distro packaging politics. If my software is packaged for a distro, it will almost always need to go through someone else, who may or may not do a good job, or keep the software up to date, or break the software in a way that creates more support requests for me.)



They may not like use of generative AI in general, but they are clearly only talking about a policy relating to original contributions to Gentoo specifically.

This is tangential, but as a user I vastly prefer distributions, because I can rely on stuff working in context, on observing the distro conventions, and on automatically receiving security updates. It is a much more pleasant and convenient mode of software sourcing.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: