GNU bug report logs - #65924
git searches coreutils and util-linux commands in PATH

Previous Next

Full log

Message #313 received at 65924 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Liliana Marie Prikler <liliana.prikler <at> gmail.com>
To: bokr <at> bokr.com
Cc: 65924 <at> debbugs.gnu.org, Maxim Cournoyer <maxim.cournoyer <at> gmail.com>
Subject: Re: bug#65924: git searches coreutils and util-linux commands in PATH
Date: Tue, 10 Oct 2023 06:28:31 +0200

Am Montag, dem 09.10.2023 um 23:03 +0200 schrieb bokr <at> bokr.com:
> Hi,
> 
> On +2023-10-09 20:33:38 +0200, Liliana Marie Prikler wrote:
> > I don't necessarily agree, but it's not a hard disagree either. 
> > I'll try to keep that in mind at least when reviewing your patches
> > to not cause confusion.
> > 
> > Cheers
> > 
> 
> TL;DR: Would it make sense to anticipate that LLM-bots will be used
> to automate gathering of info for reviewers?
> 
> If so, what would a style guide for english in posts (like
> a coding style guide, but for LLM-bot consumption) look like?
> Some kind of literate programming for LLM-bot and human use?
Let's not rely on large language models.  If we are going to automate
this, it ought to be through interpretable, "rule-based" systems. 
Like, imagine that on top of telling debbugs to close a bug etc., you
could tell debbugs (or some other tool) that some patch or a series
looks good to you.  We could then add an interface to allow filtering
for "looks good" series for quick patch application, the rationale
being that committers have to do less or no review of their own as they
commit to a patch or series.*

Cheers

* They should still check that the series actually looks good to enough
folks.

Previous Next

GNU bug tracking system
Copyright (C) 1999 Darren O. Benham, 1997,2003 nCipher Corporation Ltd, 1994-97 Ian Jackson.