Russ Allbery <[email protected]> writes:

4. As you discovered, finding the training data, even when upstream has
retained it (which I suspect will not always be the case, since I
expect in at least some cases upstream would just start over if they
wanted to retrain the model and therefore would view at least some of
the training data as equivalent to ephemeral object files they would
discard), is not going to be easy since almost no one cares. This is of
course not a new problem in free software, and we have long experience
with telling upstreams that no, we really do care about all of the
source code, but it is incrementally more work of a type that most
Debian packagers truly dislike doing.

This makes me wonder what "the preferred form for modification" is when
it comes to training data for gnubg (and the related examples discussed
here), if the answer is "if we needed to re-train the model for whatever
reason we'd start from scratch".

[in any case, I think I'd +1 the suggestion else-thread to hold off
applying any of this until after the trixie release]

Matthew

--
"At least you know where you are with Microsoft."
"True. I just wish I'd brought a paddle."
http://www.debian.org

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)