On 07/26/2026 11:48 AM CEST Moritz Angermann via ghc-devs <ghc-devs@haskell.org> wrote:
I cannot in good conscience contribute to, or advocate for, a project that institutionally ranks otherwise acceptable contributors or their work in this way.
So, you're willing to change your (and your team's) contribution to a project based on your personal morals, and you are advocating changes to GHC's contribution policy based on your personal sense of morality as well. Can you spare a bit of empathy for people who are concerned about, e.g. global warming or loss of drinking water due to LLMs (not to mention code quality)?
I am not arguing that anyone should be forced to use LLMs, nor that anyone should be compelled to review LLM-assisted contributions. Contributors remain free to review—or not review—whatever they choose. Just as they are today.
With this sentence you reveal you haven't assimilated, at all, the point Jaro made in his 3-sentence email. (Nor the one I and several others have written previously.) Instead you wrote a 392-word reply, which we all had to read to realize you were just restating your points from your _34 other emails_ on this list. The next-most-prolific contributor here is SPJ with 15 emails. - Tom