Jean Louis <[email protected]> writes:
* Ihor Radchenko <[email protected]> [2026-03-25 09:29]:
Also, I think I need to be clear here - we do not currently
suffer from
high inflow of LLM-generated patches, unlike some other
projects.
From my perspective, beyond aligning with GNU policy, we should
simply
make sure that our contributor community keeps being healthy.
That
involves addressing both concerns about LLMs from some
community
members, as well as not alienating LLM users (who are only
growing in
numbers, including some prominent community members, like John
Wiegley).
Future people will be saying like this:
---------------------------------------
The old mailing list was unwelcoming and exhausting. Simple
questions
met with cryptic cynicism, conversations wandered off-topic, and
getting help felt like a draining battle rather than
collaboration.
Today, instead of navigating harsh conversations with strangers
who
might or might not help, I simply ask a local LLM and get a
clear
answer instantly. The struggle of dealing with unknown people is
gone,
replaced by a tool that is patient, direct, and always
available.
I certainly hope that this is not how the Org mode mailing list is
interpreted by future historians.
I've followed discussions here at least since Org mode 6--about
twenty years--and have found the community to be remarkably
welcome and helpful.
I'm fascinated how the Org mode community manages to organize and
maintain volunteers for long-term action. Too often, IMHO, it
takes mountains of money to achieve something as useful as Org
mode.
The mailing list is a happy place for me.
All the best,
Tom
--
Thomas S. Dye
https://tsdye.online/tsdye
