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

[Andy Wang via Gdb <gdb@sourceware.org>]

I'm surprised that I am reading the whole thread this beautiful Friday
afternoon.  It is a total waste of time. GNU is dead, its spirit is
gone and we should abandon it to welcome this AI world where we can do
anything with Agents.

On Thu, Jun 18, 2026 at 1:11 PM Thomas Dineen via Gdb
<gdb@sourceware.org> wrote:
>
> Polite words do not seem to work! So here it is:
>
> This reflector is exclusively for the development of GDB Open source
> Software!!!
>
> Take your AI garbage to the appropriate forum.
>
>
>
> On 6/17/2026 10:27 PM, Eli Zaretskii via Gdb wrote:
> >> Cc: Mark Wielaard <mark@klomp.org>, Andrew Pinski <pinskia@gmail.com>,
> >>   Adhemerval Zanella Netto <adhemerval.zanella@linaro.org>, glibc
> >>   developers <libc-alpha@sourceware.org>, gdb developers <gdb@sourceware.org>
> >> Date: Wed, 17 Jun 2026 13:28:57 -0300
> >> From: Alexandre Oliva via Gdb <gdb@sourceware.org>
> >>
> >> Now, if it was another mailing list member forwarding spam that
> >> advertised a 30-days-gratis bait for a service entirely misaligned with
> >> the purposes of GNU in general and of GNU libc specifically, to the
> >> point of opposing those purposes, would you still be favorable to it?
> > That's a significant exaggeration, to put it mildly.  I invite you
> > (and everyone else who wants to make up their minds independently) to
> > re-read the original message posted by David.  I find no advertisement
> > there, let alone spam.
> >
> > Here's that message again:
> >
> >    Anthropic is generously offering 6 months of Claude Max 20x to Free
> >    and Open Source Software projects to support the FOSS
> >    ecosystem. These tools can be incredibly helpful with reviewing
> >    upstream code, evaluating the conformance of a particular interface
> >    to a standard, or just for your own learning and exploring the
> >    implementation of the project or subsystem.
> >
> >    If you are an established, active contributor to the GNU Toolchain
> >    and are interested in having access to Claude Max 20x under
> >    Anthropic’s Claude for Open Source program, please respond to this
> >    email thread with a short description of how you would utilize the
> >    access and the potential impact on the GNU Toolchain.  The program's
> >    slots are limited and Carlos O'Donell and I plan to review the
> >    proposals. Please keep in mind that these are individual grants from
> >    Anthropic to you personally. If you are approved you’ll get an email
> >    from Anthropic with further instructions.
> >
> >    While the current GNU Project policy is not to accept LLM-generated
> >    content in the projects, that still leaves other uses like bug
> >    triage, patch review, and research as ways to use these tools.
> >
> > This basically says that if someone wants to use the 6-month offer to
> > work on GNU tools, they should describe their plans and apply for a
> > slot in using the tools.  That's it.  It even explicitly says in a
> > P.S. that "This is not an endorsement of Anthropic, Claude or LLMs".
> >
> > Please be fair and don't accuse people who post here in something they
> > didn't say.  You don't have to agree, and you don't need to volunteer
> > to use Anthropic's proposal, but let's have minimally-civil
> > discussions here, okay?  Even your selection of
> > intentionally-denigrating words ("spam", "losers", etc.) is highly
> > inappropriate in civilized discussions, given what the original
> > message actually said.
> >
> >> Will your stance change when bots subscribe to these lists, and then
> >> start posting advertisement targeted at our developers but otherwise
> >> bearing no relationship with the project?  Will you then call for such
> >> spam to be blocked, or will we all have to endure it because some day
> >> you decreed that it was ok?
> > Not relevant.  Blocking spam and bots, regardless of the content of
> > those messages, is the job of the list moderators and they generally
> > do their job just fine so far.
> >
> >>> Where I draw the line, and where it can be drawn is in what we write down
> >>> in our documentation, likewise in our process.
> >> Our mailing lists are part of the project as well, and people who take
> >> part in the project or even lead it are expected to behave in line with
> >> the project, rather than against it, at the very least when
> >> participating in project fora and activities.
> >>
> >> Advertising services antagonic to and destructive of user freedom is
> >> really way out of line.
> > Again, there was no advertising.  This is uncalled-for.  Please find
> > more polite words to express your disagreement (if you must: after
> > all, that was a call for volunteers, and you don't have to volunteer
> > nor respond if you don't like the proposal).
> >
> > More generally, I'm disappointed by the hostility and the general
> > style some people allow themselves to use in this discussion.  We
> > don't deserve to call ourselves a community that promotes a better
> > society if we cannot talk between ourselves in a kinder manner.  Shame
> > on us!