Collection of this group's data for a LLM-powered weekly report

abompard commented

2026-09-09 11:46:55 +00:00

Hi folks,

I'm generating a weekly report of activity in the Fedora project centered on teams and SIGs, it's called This Week in Fedora. This generation uses an LLM. The goal is to make it easier to catch up with everything that's going on in the project, and to give visibility to each group's work and requests for help or testing. I think that from a newcomer's point of view, having an insight on what a group is working on at a point in time is helpful to decide whether it's interesting and worth contributing to.
I'm collecting activity from:

the following mailing-lists: qa-devel, test, and test-announce
discourse posts with the #quality-team tag
this tracker
meetings in Matrix meeting channels

In the latest version, I've added the possiblity to gather messages exchanged in Matrix channels. The #quality channel is public and its history is available to anyone, but a quite a few people in mutiple Matrix channels were unhappy about the LLM collecting this info, for various reasons.
I would like to know whether this group is OK with my program collecting and submitting info to an LLM from the following sources:

mailing-lists, discourse posts and meetings
the tracker
the matrix channel

I would like to make the case for source 3 (the Matrix channel) because I think it's less obvious: knowing the "tone" of a conversation and the currently discussed subjects before joining is very important to help contribute to it. It's like when you're added to an empty group chat and you don't know how to start. That's why we show history to new channel members, and this would be the same idea at a higher level. Plus there's actual work going on in there for a lot of groups.
That said, I recognize that the form of the tool influences its use, chat messages are usually less thought-through than emails or forum posts, and members could be indimidated that something they write there and regret end up in a visible summary (the program respects message edits, but anyway).
Since my goal is to foster participation, the one thing I don't want to do is to hinder it in another way.

I know I've asked this in the chat yesterday but someone in another room noted that people can easily miss Matrix messages, which it true.

Please decide which collected sources, if any, you are OK with (and if you work in other places that you would like to have collected, of course (I can do RSS feeds!)). If the group is OK with Matrix channel collection but some individuals aren't, I can also exclude certain Matrix usernames from collection throughout the Matrix channels that are not meetings.

I'm happy to answer questions if you have any. Thanks!

Hi folks, I'm generating a weekly report of activity in the Fedora project centered on teams and SIGs, it's called [This Week in Fedora](https://abompard.fedorapeople.org/twif/). This generation uses an LLM. The goal is to make it easier to catch up with everything that's going on in the project, and to give visibility to each group's work and requests for help or testing. I think that from a newcomer's point of view, having an insight on what a group is working on at a point in time is helpful to decide whether it's interesting and worth contributing to. I'm collecting activity from: - the following mailing-lists: `qa-devel`, `test`, and `test-announce` - discourse posts with the `#quality-team` tag - this tracker - meetings in Matrix meeting channels In the latest version, I've added the possiblity to gather messages exchanged in Matrix channels. The `#quality` channel is public and its history is available to anyone, but a quite a few people in mutiple Matrix channels were unhappy about the LLM collecting this info, for various reasons. I would like to know whether this group is OK with my program collecting and submitting info to an LLM from the following sources: 1. mailing-lists, discourse posts and meetings 2. the tracker 3. the matrix channel I would like to make the case for source 3 (the Matrix channel) because I think it's less obvious: knowing the "tone" of a conversation and the currently discussed subjects before joining is very important to help contribute to it. It's like when you're added to an empty group chat and you don't know how to start. That's why we show history to new channel members, and this would be the same idea at a higher level. Plus there's actual work going on in there for a lot of groups. That said, I recognize that the form of the tool influences its use, chat messages are usually less thought-through than emails or forum posts, and members could be indimidated that something they write there and regret end up in a visible summary (the program respects message edits, but anyway). Since my goal is to foster participation, the one thing I don't want to do is to hinder it in another way. I know I've asked this in the chat yesterday but someone in another room noted that people can easily miss Matrix messages, which it true. Please decide which collected sources, if any, you are OK with (and if you work in other places that you would like to have collected, of course (I can do RSS feeds!)). If the group is OK with Matrix channel collection but some individuals aren't, I can also exclude certain Matrix usernames from collection throughout the Matrix channels that are not meetings. I'm happy to answer questions if you have any. Thanks!

kparal commented

2026-09-11 12:57:00 +00:00

Owner

I think you can drop qa-devel. It's a dead mailing list that we want to archive, see #903.

this tracker

Does it mean https://forge.fedoraproject.org/quality/tickets or everything under https://forge.fedoraproject.org/quality/ ? We have a https://forge.fedoraproject.org/quality/planning/ repo that is public, but we use it to track tasks that are personal or internal (while not sensitive). That repo contents probably shouldn't be included in the summary, that could be confusing in some cases.

Please decide which collected sources, if any, you are OK with

I'm OK with all the mentioned sources, they are public. If other team members don't speak up here, we'll discuss it on our team meeting on Tuesday and update this ticket.

Thanks for your work!

I think you can drop `qa-devel`. It's a dead mailing list that we want to archive, see #903. > this tracker Does it mean https://forge.fedoraproject.org/quality/tickets or everything under https://forge.fedoraproject.org/quality/ ? We have a https://forge.fedoraproject.org/quality/planning/ repo that is public, but we use it to track tasks that are personal or internal (while not sensitive). That repo contents probably shouldn't be included in the summary, that could be confusing in some cases. > Please decide which collected sources, if any, you are OK with I'm OK with all the mentioned sources, they are public. If other team members don't speak up here, we'll discuss it on our team meeting on Tuesday and update this ticket. Thanks for your work!

kparal added the

labels

2026-09-11 12:57:45 +00:00

kparal added this to the Sprint 15 (ends 2026-10-05) project

2026-09-11 12:57:54 +00:00

kparal self-assigned this

2026-09-11 12:57:59 +00:00

adamwill commented

2026-09-11 15:09:41 +00:00

Owner

I do worry a little about the impact of ingesting Matrix. Speaking personally, when I write something for "permanent" media - a mailing list post, a forum post, a blog post, stuff like that - I make sure to be...not professional, but you know, something like that. I don't make dumb jokes or ironically talk about how we're doing a terrible job or make cryptic references to internal RH dramas. I sometimes do those things on Matrix because, for me, Matrix is coded as 'ephemeral', even though technically I know it's all logged somewhere (and even in the days of IRC, somebody with a bouncer was logging it all somewhere).

There's still some stuff I wouldn't say on Matrix obvs, but there's a clear difference in my head, and I worry that knowing it's all going to be sucked up by an LLM and used to generate some kind of Permanent Record will affect that. I like having a place where we can be freewheeling and make dumb jokes and say stuff we don't really mean. It's an important safety valve, I think. I also worry that if this happens, folks would wind up creating (a) private channel(s) for the loose stuff, and then we're losing transparency...

I do worry a little about the impact of ingesting Matrix. Speaking personally, when I write something for "permanent" media - a mailing list post, a forum post, a blog post, stuff like that - I make sure to be...not professional, but you know, something like that. I don't make dumb jokes or ironically talk about how we're doing a terrible job or make cryptic references to internal RH dramas. I sometimes do those things on Matrix because, for me, Matrix is coded as 'ephemeral', even though technically I know it's all logged somewhere (and even in the days of IRC, *somebody* with a bouncer was logging it all somewhere). There's still *some* stuff I wouldn't say on Matrix obvs, but there's a clear difference in my head, and I worry that knowing it's all going to be sucked up by an LLM and used to generate some kind of Permanent Record will affect that. I *like* having a place where we can be freewheeling and make dumb jokes and say stuff we don't really mean. It's an important safety valve, I think. I also worry that if this happens, folks would wind up creating (a) private channel(s) for the loose stuff, and then we're losing transparency...

lruzicka commented

2026-09-11 15:19:52 +00:00

Owner

I agree with Adam. I like doing puns and various jokes that sometimes turn up stupid because English is not my first language. Still, I am trying. However, for some people from the outside, this might sound weird. Mostly what I talk about in Matrix channels is meant for people in that Matrix channel in the context of a specific group (even at meetings).

I do not want managers or anybody studying what I have been typing there when they do not have that particular context (neither the AI has it), nor I want AI to interpret what I say.

I am also not very happy about excluding my nickname from the report, because that might look like I am not present there and it could make me non-existent for people who'd only rely on the AI report. And if sometimes, the activity on Matrix will mean the division line between a job and a no job?

Sure, I can start "behaving" in those recorded channels, but somehow the freedom of speech that we have been having is at stake.

I agree with Adam. I like doing puns and various jokes that sometimes turn up stupid because English is not my first language. Still, I am trying. However, for some people from the outside, this might sound weird. Mostly what I talk about in Matrix channels is meant for people in that Matrix channel in the context of a specific group (even at meetings). I do not want managers or anybody studying what I have been typing there when they do not have that particular context (neither the AI has it), nor I want AI to interpret what I say. I am also not very happy about excluding my nickname from the report, because that might look like I am not present there and it could make me non-existent for people who'd only rely on the AI report. And if sometimes, the activity on Matrix will mean the division line between a job and a no job? Sure, I can start "behaving" in those recorded channels, but somehow the freedom of speech that we have been having is at stake.

jgroman commented

2026-09-14 08:11:43 +00:00

Owner

I second Adam's opinion. Matrix channel is just too informal and any useful info mentioned there can be already obtained from other sources.

abompard commented

2026-09-14 08:33:08 +00:00

Author

I think you can drop qa-devel. It's a dead mailing list that we want to archive, see #903.

Thanks!

this tracker

Does it mean https://forge.fedoraproject.org/quality/tickets or everything under https://forge.fedoraproject.org/quality/ ? We have a https://forge.fedoraproject.org/quality/planning/ repo that is public, but we use it to track tasks that are personal or internal (while not sensitive). That repo contents probably shouldn't be included in the summary, that could be confusing in some cases.

It's only quality/tickets.

I understand the sentiment about the tone in the Matrix channel being changed by knowing you're being possibly summarized.

Should I wait for more responses? If not, I'll disable collection from the Matrix channel.

> I think you can drop `qa-devel`. It's a dead mailing list that we want to archive, see #903. Thanks! > > this tracker > > Does it mean https://forge.fedoraproject.org/quality/tickets or everything under https://forge.fedoraproject.org/quality/ ? We have a https://forge.fedoraproject.org/quality/planning/ repo that is public, but we use it to track tasks that are personal or internal (while not sensitive). That repo contents probably shouldn't be included in the summary, that could be confusing in some cases. It's only `quality/tickets`. I understand the sentiment about the tone in the Matrix channel being changed by knowing you're being possibly summarized. Should I wait for more responses? If not, I'll disable collection from the Matrix channel.

kparal commented

2026-09-14 14:50:06 +00:00

Owner

I think we have enough voices for excluding Matrix, so let's do that.

Thanks Aurélien. Feel free to reopen if anything else needs further discussion.

I think we have enough voices for excluding Matrix, so let's do that. Thanks Aurélien. Feel free to reopen if anything else needs further discussion.

kparal

2026-09-14 14:50:06 +00:00