On Sat, 2025-01-11 at 13:49 +0100, Fabio Fantoni wrote: > > Today trying to see how a new person who wants to start maintaining new > packages would do and trying to do research thinking from his point of > view and from simple searches on the internet I found unfortunately that > these parts are fragmented and do not help at all to aim for something > unified but not even simple and fast enough.
And those fragments also changes as the time goes by. Such as the sbuild schroot -> unshare changes. They are not necessarily well documented in every introduction material for new comers. Even if somebody in Debian community has enough time to overhaul everything and create a new documentation, it will become the situation described in XKCD meme "standards": xkcd.com/927/ -- we just got yet another document as a fragment as time goes by. LLMs are good companions as long as the strong ones are used. In order to help new comers to learn, it is better for Debian to allocate some LLM API credits to them, instead of hoping for someone to work on the documentation and falling in the XKCD-927 infinite loop. Considering the price, the LLM API call for helping all DDs + newcomers, I believe, will be cheaper than hiring a real person to overhaul those documentations and keep them up to date. This is a feasible way to partly solve the issue without endlessly waiting for the HERO to appear. Debian should consider allocating some budget like several hundred USD per month for the LLM API calls for all members and new-comers' usage. DebGPT can be hooked somewhere within the debian development process, such as sbuild/ratt for build log analysis, etc. It is cheap enough and people will eventually figure out the useful apsect of them. Opinion against this post will include something about hallucination. In the case LLM write something that does not compile at all, or write some non-existent API, a human is intelligent enough to easily notice that build failure or lintian error and tell whether it is hallucination or not. I personally believe LLMs, at the current stage, is useful as long as used and interpreted properly. BTW, I was in the middle of evaluation LLMs for the nm-template. I did lots of procrastinations towards finishing the evaluation, but the first several questions were answered perfectly. https://salsa.debian.org/lumin/ai-noises/-/tree/main/nm-templates?ref_type=heads If anybody is interested in seeing the LLM evaluation against nm-templates, please let me know and your message will be significantly useful for me to conquer my procrastination on it.
