Re: Nominations for Anthropic’s Claude for Open Source program

[Mark Wielaard <mark@klomp.org>]

Hi Carlos,

On Mon, Jun 15, 2026 at 05:11:18PM -0400, Carlos O'Donell wrote:
> On 6/15/26 7:39 AM, Mark Wielaard wrote:
> >On Fri, 2026-06-12 at 16:11 -0700, Andrew Pinski via Gdb wrote:
> >>All of this talk about llm and llm reviews is off-topic for this list.
> >>Including the original email is off-topic and should not have been sent.
> >
> >Agreed, promoting the use of a commercial, non-free, proprietary llm
> >through a saas model is not appropriate and off-topic for the GNU
> >development lists.
> 
> I disagree.
> 
> For all the reasons David lists here and more:
> https://inbox.sourceware.org/gcc/CAGWvnyk1x47jPWs3ML01J-TrgKt8ByALj3HzPpZodVS_73VSBg@mail.gmail.com/
> 
> We should always be able to *talk* about non-free alternatives, how to use
> them, what they do, how to create alternatives, and how to move away from them.

As explained to David nobody said you cannot talk about alternatives.
But that is something completely different from advertising the
specific use of a commercial, non-free, proprietary llm.

> >>Carlos,
> >>   Can you step down from the llm gcc working group for this email since it
> >>shows a conflict of interest of prompting one product.  Plus it shows poor
> >>taste of sending out an email about a non free product to a mailing list
> >>about glibc development.
> >>Can I also ask you to step down from CoC for violating the CoC here?
> >
> >Yeah. It is hard to not see a pattern here. But not sure it is enough
> >for banning someone. And we all make mistakes from time to time. But we
> >do want to avoid the appearance of a conflict of interest.
> Sorry, could you please expand on the pattern you see?

Just that the David and Carlos show seems to have this pattern of
maximal drama. Where you promote some corporate deal so "generous"
that people shouldn't question whether it is ethical, undermines the
community or the gnu project goals. Then when people obviously do
point out these issues you start attacking the community volunteers
that do the actual work and pick a needless fight with the FSF about
"purity" and "leadership".

Cheers,

Mark