Debian exists. It has existed for decades. It works. "Oh but AI makes it faster" so fucking what? We didn't need "faster" for years whilst it worked fine, it's not a product on a deadline.

[–] EarMaster@lemmy.world 15 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago) (1 children)

That's true. Nonetheless the maintainers seem to see AI as a valid way to reduce their workload.

[–] abc@suppo.fi 5 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago) (1 children)

As someone who has done package management for a distro at one point in my life... after the initial push, it is so incredibly boring.

I think AI should do all of it. I'm entirely certain that things would be better, not worse, if we did. 99% of problems related to that stuff is because it's so fucking boring that humans just simply cannot pay the kind of attention it requires to be safe.

[–] Kaligalis@lemmy.world 3 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Current AI is still like that incredibly knowledgeable senior dev with a drug problem. Everything done by AI still needs to be checked by a human in case the AI just hallucinated the wildest shit even though it did the same thing just right ten times before.
Right now, AI is a great tool. It will probably become reliable enough to replace human maintainers. But no one knows when that happens.

[–] abc@suppo.fi 1 points 17 hours ago* (last edited 17 hours ago)

Current AI is still like that incredibly knowledgeable senior dev with a drug problem.

So you mean exactly like most package maintainers prior to AI?

[–] Sina@beehaw.org 7 points 2 days ago (2 children)

No community distro has the capacity to fork thousands of packages and maintain them. That's what a true no Ai policy would require. I also have to add that the Linux kernel itself would need to be forked and then maintained. Just the latter point alone is enough to make all this moot.

[–] LodeMike@lemmy.today 3 points 1 day ago

No this was for Debian only.

[–] soc@programming.dev 5 points 2 days ago

Completely missing the point.