Good so Debian will die soon or later.

Interesting that this makes no distinction from using LLM output and using LLM assistance. An overly strict policy is better than no policy, but I wonder if using llm for conversation and analysis, but not code/config generation, was discussed.

  > Documentation and translations added by Debian contributors

I wonder what fraction of Trixie already violates this requirement of the first proposal...

What comprises “assistance?” Getting Claude Code to find bugs, suggest a fix, but a human actually editing the source files and testing the result - is that assistance? Perhaps this policy is as it says: a guiding principle that the community is expected to follow.

Curious what the "use" or "assistance" of LLM models means. I mostly use Gemini as a front-end to search Google without getting ads or SEO garbage, would that be forbidden?

i think the line is: expressing that you reputationally certify its correct and its worth the time

I certainly hope they'll choose C.

> A LLM (...) merely produces syntactically likely combinations of the training data

While doesn't matter much in the rest of the policy, this is a common misconception among AI skeptics. It is not the case for a long time (since RL is used heavily in the training) and a LLM may go beyond its training data.