| Sysop: | Amessyroom |
|---|---|
| Location: | Fayetteville, NC |
| Users: | 26 |
| Nodes: | 6 (0 / 6) |
| Uptime: | 61:21:58 |
| Calls: | 481 |
| Files: | 1,072 |
| Messages: | 96,147 |
...
Debian should consider allocating some budget like several hundred USD
per month for the LLM API calls for all members and new-comers' usage.
I don't think Debian should as an organization pay for LLMs. On the
contrary I would expect LLM providers to offer API keys for free to
Debian Developers just like we have other perks listed at https://wiki.debian.org/MemberBenefits.
Considering how much the LLMs have utilized open source software when building and training them, it would actually make a lot of sense for
those companies to step up and partner with Debian just like many web
hosting companies have, as they all likewise have built their
businesses on top of open source software. Currently, I don't see any
AI companies at https://www.debian.org/partners/.
If anyone has contacts at OpenAI, Anthropic, xAI, DeepSeek, 01 AI,
Zhipu AI, Meta, Mistral, Nexus, Alibaba, AI21 Labs, Cohere etc, please
tell them about the opportunity to sponsor Debian :)
Codex CLI is built for developers who already live in the terminal and
want ChatGPT-level reasoning plus the power to actually run code,
manipulate files, and iterate - all under version control. In short,
it's chat-driven development that understands and executes your repo.
* Zero setup - bring your OpenAI API key and it just works! Full
* auto-approval, while safe + secure by running network-disabled and
* directory-sandboxed Multimodal - pass in screenshots or diagrams to
implement features ✨
And it's fully open-source so you can see and contribute to how it
develops!
(Of course, the "open source" part applies to the client app, not to the model)
OpenAI has an Open Source fund. Maybe Debian should apply[1] for a grant
so that Debian contributors could get hands-on experience on how this
could help their Debian activities?
I'm willing to handle the paperwork and apply on behalf on Debian (and
then handle giving access to DDs), but of course this would need DPL
approval (Cced).
[0]https://github.com/openai/codex [1]https://openai.com/form/codex-open-source-fund/
Lucas
OpenAI has an Open Source fund. Maybe Debian should apply[1] for a grant
so that Debian contributors could get hands-on experience on how this
could help their Debian activities?
On Wed, Jun 04, 2025 at 05:04:34PM +0200, Lucas Nussbaum wrote:
OpenAI has an Open Source fund. Maybe Debian should apply[1] for a grant
so that Debian contributors could get hands-on experience on how this
could help their Debian activities?
or maybe Debian should not.
On Fri, Jun 06, 2025 at 12:03:32PM +0200, Lucas Nussbaum wrote:
or maybe Debian should not.Maybe. Honestly, I don't know.
I'd rather not take their offer based on moral grounds: they stole
and
steal from everyone and want to make that normal. And for that, they
offer some breadcrumbs to the people they stole from.
Also they contribute massivly to burning down our only planet faster.
On Fri, Jun 06, 2025 at 12:48:11PM +0200, Ansgar 🙀 wrote:
Also they contribute massivly to burning down our only planetSo do in-person conferences, rebuilding software just to observe
faster.
that
no changes happen,
horseshit. those things dont require dozens of entire powerplants...
or maybe Debian should not.Maybe. Honestly, I don't know.
Also they contribute massivly to burning down our only planet faster.So do in-person conferences, rebuilding software just to observe that
no changes happen,
OpenAI has an Open Source fund. Maybe Debian should apply[1] for a grant so that Debian contributors could get hands-on experience on how this could help their Debian activities?
or maybe Debian should not.
Maybe. Honestly, I don't know.
(A) an "agent", that is the client software running on your machine that
you talk with, and that interacts with your codebase (read files, make changes to files, run commands, create git commits, etc.). Ideally in
some kind of sandbox and/or with permissions management.
Examples include 'Claude Code' (works in CLI, proprietary, interacts
only with Anthropic models), Cursor(.com) (VS Code fork, proprietary, interacts with either Claude* (Anthropic) or Gemini* (Google)), Codex
CLI (free software, developed by OpenAI and focused on their models, but supposed to work with other providers). DebGPT fits here too (but is
less advanced for coding tasks than Claude Code or Cursor).
(B) a way to query models:
- either subscription-based from commercial services such as OpenAI,
Anthropic, Gemini, ... or brokers like OpenRouter.
- or using "open" models that you can download and run yourself,
typically with ollama (free software)
(C) good matching between (A) and (B): it helps if the client side (A)
knows how to tune to queries ("prompt engineering") for the specific provider/model in use (B). Typically, in my tests, trying to use Codex
CLI with ollama fails there (or I could not find a model that produced reasonable results). (Also the OpenAI API has variants that are not
supported by all models ("tools support").)
Hi!
OpenAI has an Open Source fund. Maybe Debian should apply[1] for a grant
so that Debian contributors could get hands-on experience on how this could help their Debian activities?
or maybe Debian should not.
Maybe. Honestly, I don't know.
I still think it would be a nice perk for DDs, along the other perks
listed at https://wiki.debian.org/MemberBenefits
It is up to each DD to decide how to use the tools and services.
Personally I don't recommend using them to generate code as in the
Debian context they seem to output so much bad results, but using
LLM's for example to review code seems to be working pretty well and
is faster and cheaper than waiting for humans to review (and humans
can still review, they will just seem more polished stuff).
(A) an "agent", that is the client software running on your machine that you talk with, and that interacts with your codebase (read files, make changes to files, run commands, create git commits, etc.). Ideally in
some kind of sandbox and/or with permissions management.
Examples include 'Claude Code' (works in CLI, proprietary, interacts
only with Anthropic models), Cursor(.com) (VS Code fork, proprietary, interacts with either Claude* (Anthropic) or Gemini* (Google)), Codex
CLI (free software, developed by OpenAI and focused on their models, but supposed to work with other providers). DebGPT fits here too (but is
less advanced for coding tasks than Claude Code or Cursor).
All of the above are closed-source solutions.
I have been playing
around with the fully open https://aider.chat/ for well over a year
and I would recommend it instead. I hope to some day write a blog post
about how I run it inside a container safely and how I have customized
it to give better results than what it does out-of-the-box.
All of the above are closed-source solutions.
Not Codex CLI
I have been playing
around with the fully open https://aider.chat/ for well over a year
and I would recommend it instead. I hope to some day write a blog post about how I run it inside a container safely and how I have customized
it to give better results than what it does out-of-the-box.
Right, aider.chat came up in another discussion, and looks promising.
There was an ITP about it (#1082026, abandonned).
Another Free Software alternative is Zed (https://github.com/zed-industries/zed), but it looks less open in the
spirit than Aider.
My experience is a bit different -- I've found it useful to treat the LLM
as an inexperienced coworker:
- decide on what I would like to do
- ask the LLM to do it
- review carefully
- refine what the LLM proposes either by asking with more details, or
edit directly
On 11/06/25 at 22:10 +0300, Otto KekΣlΣinen wrote:
Hi!
OpenAI has an Open Source fund. Maybe Debian should apply[1] for a grant
so that Debian contributors could get hands-on experience on how this could help their Debian activities?
or maybe Debian should not.
Maybe. Honestly, I don't know.
I still think it would be a nice perk for DDs, along the other perks
listed at https://wiki.debian.org/MemberBenefits
It is up to each DD to decide how to use the tools and services.
Personally I don't recommend using them to generate code as in the
Debian context they seem to output so much bad results, but using
LLM's for example to review code seems to be working pretty well and
is faster and cheaper than waiting for humans to review (and humans
can still review, they will just seem more polished stuff).
My experience is a bit different -- I've found it useful to treat the LLM
as an inexperienced coworker:
- decide on what I would like to do
- ask the LLM to do it
- review carefully
- refine what the LLM proposes either by asking with more details, or
edit directly
(A) an "agent", that is the client software running on your machine that you talk with, and that interacts with your codebase (read files, make changes to files, run commands, create git commits, etc.). Ideally in some kind of sandbox and/or with permissions management.
Examples include 'Claude Code' (works in CLI, proprietary, interacts
only with Anthropic models), Cursor(.com) (VS Code fork, proprietary, interacts with either Claude* (Anthropic) or Gemini* (Google)), Codex
CLI (free software, developed by OpenAI and focused on their models, but supposed to work with other providers). DebGPT fits here too (but is
less advanced for coding tasks than Claude Code or Cursor).
All of the above are closed-source solutions.
Not Codex CLI
I have been playing
around with the fully open https://aider.chat/ for well over a year
and I would recommend it instead. I hope to some day write a blog post about how I run it inside a container safely and how I have customized
it to give better results than what it does out-of-the-box.
Right, aider.chat came up in another discussion, and looks promising.
There was an ITP about it (#1082026, abandonned).
Another Free Software alternative is Zed (https://github.com/zed-industries/zed), but it looks less open in the
spirit than Aider.
Other closed-source products are WindSurf, Augment Code.
Lucas