The proposed handling of LLM in Debian in the latest "Bits from the DPL" is a bit concerning.

[benjamineskola@hachyderm.io]

@beeoproblem @mathew @zerodogg Yes, precisely. In my experience they produce a lot of output and when you dig through it all there's not actually very much of value to it.

And, besides which, if the argument against them is that they're based on plagiarism, that still applies if they're being used for review/analysis and not generation of new code.

[malcolm@sns.internationalotaku.com]

@zerodogg Slackware is llm free afaik (this is NOT a serious suggestion to be clear)

[mathew@universeodon.com]

@beeoproblem @benjamineskola @zerodogg Well, yes, and it’s still problematic that corporations are using code contrary to its license to build and ship their analysis tools; but using those tools doesn’t taint an entire project the way code generation does.

[jasonaowen@recurse.social]

@zerodogg @ehashman I'm disappointed that I only saw one person mention the ethical concerns, and nobody replied: https://lists.debian.org/debian-vote/2026/02/msg00060.html

[jasonaowen@recurse.social]

@zerodogg @ehashman I also am unimpressed by the argument that people could use LLMs secretly and pass off its work as their own. They could also be stealing copyrighted code from somewhere; what's the difference? Difficulty of enforcement is not a reason not to try!

[nik@toot.teckids.org]

@zerodogg #NotMyDPL

[ehashman@cloudisland.nz]

@jasonaowen @zerodogg people aren't going to reply if there's nothing to add. ("+1" emails on mailing lists are obnoxious.) @demoographics said what they said and said it well

[spacewizard@mas.to]

@gourd @zerodogg I haven't been able to talk myself quite into trying Gentoo but who knows this could push me over the edge

[andres4ny@social.ridetrans.it]

@zerodogg Note that I haven't seen a project-wide decision on this (yet). That's just the current DPL's opinion.

[zerodogg@hachyderm.io]

@Andres4NY And that does give me some hope. Debian has a strong track record of doing the right thing. But the way it was presented by the elected leader was discouraging, and it does matter what the leadership says.

[zerodogg@hachyderm.io]

@ehashman @foolishowl

To begin with your last point, the goal. It is, in my mind, for Debian to take a principled stance, and base that on its existing values and ethics. It's not up to Debian if LLM's continue to see use in society at large, just as it's not up to Debian if people keep using non-free alternatives. But Debian can make a difference, and I'd argue that Debian does so every day. Debian *is* different from many other distributions. One only needs to look at the social contract to see that, and Debian goes to great lengths to uphold it. Debian is important partly because it puts its values first.

As for my objections, at this point it's hard to differentiate between the technology of LLMs and the harms that stem from the usage of them, mostly because those making said technology encourage harmful usage. Workers rights, a complete disrespect and active undermining of free software licenses, contributions to completely destroying the web by flooding it with nonsense and the environmental impact of training, are among my objections. I would say it's near impossible to use one in any kind of ethical way at this stage.

If Debian accepts contributions made with LLMs, then I would argue Debian is contributing to the negative effects I list above, partly by legitimizing them.

That said, If a model that respects licenses of the works it uses, a high bar it seems, has all of its training data, weights and other software licensed under a free software license, and is trained without significant environmental impact and without abuse of workers - then yes, that might be something that I could see be acceptable for contributions to Debian.

I'll also accept that there might still be LLM contributions being made, but without disclosure. But that doesn't erase the impact of taking a principled stance.

I don't need Debian to change the world on its own. But I don't prefer Debian on technical grounds alone, just like I don't write free software just because I need a particular piece of software myself.

[kkarhan@infosec.space]

@zerodogg ouch!

My disappointment is immeadureabke, #debian!

[andres4ny@social.ridetrans.it]

@zerodogg I have mixed feelings about the current DPL. On one hand, he managed to get something accomplished that was literally decades overdue (revamping the sclerotic NEW package admission process), and very much appreciated. On the other hand, the way he did it seemed very much like a bull-in-a-china-shop kind of thing.

He said in that email that he doesn't intend to run again, so we'll likely have a new DPL soon.