No subject

[Greg Troxel]

"Regina Obe" <lr at pcorp.us> writes:

>> > LLM Policy - how do we answer to people why we don't need an LLM
>> > Policy
>> 
>> Can you clarify if in the minutes there was a preceding missing:
>> 
>>   the group decided that there is no need for an LLM policy
>> 
>>   the group agreed that existing rules imply [something] (specifically
>>   about if there is or isn't a duty to disclose, and about licensing of
>>   LLM output)
>> 
>> Given the list discussion, I am surprised by the one line in the minutes.
>
> That was alluding to a grander scheme of documentation we are working on
> that
> provides guidelines on how to develop for PostGIS work whether you are using
> an LLM or not.

So there was no discussion of whether or not there should be any policy
surrunding LLM usage?  And not of whether or not current guidance bears
on this?  I thought that was on the agenda.

> Darafei is still flushing that out with his experiments as you can see here
> - https://github.com/postgis/postgis/pulls

Are those not to be merged, until there is a policy decision?   Seems
like a headlong rush.