Re: pkgsrc-wip: misc/DeepSeek-TUI renamed to misc/CodeWhale; editors/fresh 0.3.12

[David Holland <dholland-pkgtech%netbsd.org@localhost>]

On Sun, Jun 07, 2026 at 04:32:03PM +0100, Jonathan Perkin wrote:
 > Not OK: Anything considered "pkgsrc original" that could reasonably be
 > expected to have a BSD copyright attached to it, where introduction of LLM
 > code could affect that copyright, or documentation (LLM writing style is
 > unreadable, at least to me). To be more explicit:
 > 
 >  - bootstrap/
 >  - doc/
 >  - mk/
 >  - pkgtools/digest
 >  - pkgtools/pkg_install
 >  - pkgtools/libnbcompat
 >  - security/netpgpverify
 >  - ..any other sources shipped under files/ that are part of the
 >    bootstrap path or related to pkgsrc infrastructure in any way..
 >  - any package files where there is considerable logic, I'm thinking mostly
 >    larger builtin.mk files where they are probably at the state they should
 >    be moved under mk/ anyway.

Also stuff like lang/python/*.mk and lang/ocaml/ocaml.mk, which is
infrastructure that doesn't live in mk/ because it's package-specific.

I would also add that any makefile, patch, or patchset large enough to
not be obviously correct should be handwritten. There are at least
three issues here (copyright, external harms, and correctness) and
correctness often gets overlooked given the others but is arguably the
most functionally important.

Then there's another entirely different but also important question,
which is if upstream starts embracing slop to the point where it
becomes a problem for us (e.g. adding vast quantities of cutpaste slop
that only builds on Linux), what if anything we should try to do about
it.

-- 
David A. Holland
dholland%netbsd.org@localhost