this post was submitted on 15 Aug 2026
35 points (97.3% liked)

Linux

67095 readers
381 users here now

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Linux is a family of open source Unix-like operating systems based on the Linux kernel, an operating system kernel first released on September 17, 1991 by Linus Torvalds. Linux is typically packaged in a Linux distribution (or distro for short).

Distributions include the Linux kernel and supporting system software and libraries, many of which are provided by the GNU Project. Many Linux distributions use the word "Linux" in their name, but the Free Software Foundation uses the name GNU/Linux to emphasize the importance of GNU software, causing some controversy.

Rules

Related Communities

Community icon by Alpár-Etele Méder, licensed under CC BY 3.0

founded 7 years ago
MODERATORS
 

What do you think it'll happen and what do you want to happen?

Debian developers have been considering a general resolution over LLM usage within the project. After collecting a variety of proposals, voting has now commenced for Debian developers to decide how comfortable they are with AI / Large Language Model contributions in the project or not.

The choices being considered for this Debian general resolution (GR) include:

[ ] Choice 1: Ban LLM contributions from Debian via Social Contract

[ ] Choice 2: Allow AI-Assisted Contributions with conditions

[ ] Choice 3: Reject LLMs as far as practical, update Code of Conduct

[ ] Choice 4: Accept AI contributions for Debian specific work

[ ] Choice 5: Responsible Use of Generative AI

[ ] Choice 6: A cautious approach to generative AI

[ ] Choice 7: Debian is created by humans

[ ] Choice 8: Avoid the use of LLM: climate destruction is a deal breaker

[ ] Choice 9: None of the above

All the details on each of those choices can be found via the Debian.org vote page.

Additional details in this mailing list post with the voting details on the general resolution. The voting period began at midnight and is set to run through end of day 28 August.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] pastermil@sh.itjust.works 11 points 4 days ago (3 children)

What is this, a Monty Python skit? How the fuck are they gonna come with a consensus with all these choices?

There's really just choices 1 & 2. The rest are just elaboration. And what the fuck is even 'none of the above'?

Really, there's just 'yes' and 'no'. If it's a 'yes', there would certainly be condition, which can come later. If it's a 'no', who give a shit why; it's a vote, not a fucking book club. They can definitely put the reason in the comment, but do they really need to put the reasons as the choice?

[–] RogueBanana@piefed.zip 3 points 4 days ago

They used AI to come up with the choices

[–] TrollAccount69@lemmy.ml 5 points 4 days ago (1 children)
[–] pastermil@sh.itjust.works 4 points 4 days ago (1 children)

Long time Debian user. First time really paying attention to their governance process.

[–] TrollAccount69@lemmy.ml 7 points 4 days ago (1 children)

Long time Debian user and governance appreciator. Welcome. If you want some schizophrenia inducing reading material you should go back and check the long and well documented history of Debian voting.

[–] eldavi@lemmy.ml 6 points 4 days ago (2 children)

especially the adoption of systemd that was decided by only 4 people back around 2014

[–] TrollAccount69@lemmy.ml 9 points 4 days ago (1 children)

Debian: the worst Linux distribution, except for all the other ones.

[–] eldavi@lemmy.ml 1 points 2 days ago

yes and i'll be going back to it anyways. lol

[–] flying_sheep@lemmy.ml 4 points 4 days ago* (last edited 4 days ago) (2 children)

Where did you pull that number from? https://vote.debian.org/~secretary/gr_initsystems/results.txt

The smallest difference between a systemd option and a “not-onöl-systemd option” I see is

Option 2 defeats Option 4 by ( 211 - 177) = 34 votes.

And it makes sense: the most likely contender at the time was upstart, which didn't stand the test of time AFAIK (I don't think the systemd hater crowd still uses that)

So it ended up the right decision. Would they have decided differently if other good init systems had existed already? Maybe, but they didn't.

[–] eldavi@lemmy.ml 1 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago) (1 children)

https://lkml.iu.edu/hypermail/linux/kernel/1403.0/00130.html

it was fun trip down memory lane looking for this... thank you github for being down today. lol

[–] flying_sheep@lemmy.ml 1 points 2 days ago* (last edited 14 hours ago)

Yeah, no matter the truth content of this piece of tinfoil, the vote I linked shows that systemd continued being agreeable among voters.

The handful of conspiracy myth believers are now on Devuan if that still exists. Presumably mad about something else that exists only in their head.

[–] SwooshBakery624@programming.dev 0 points 4 days ago (1 children)

So it ended up the right decision. Would they have decided differently if other good init systems had existed already? Maybe, but they didn't.

Nothing, really, is stopping them from making it easier to use other init systems.

[–] SocialistVibes01@lemmy.ml 2 points 4 days ago* (last edited 4 days ago)

Yes that was very GNOME of them.

[–] vandsjov@feddit.dk 1 points 4 days ago

I would say it’s okay with more than yes/no. You could say yes, but only if code review by human. The difference is that if you can only say yes or no, you would have to say yes, but then don’t know if the details of the final rules of AI in the project would actually be a dealbreaker for you. However, these options are a little too much.