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

abompard commented

2026-09-10 14:29:15 +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 rust mailing-list
discourse posts with the #rust-sig tag
this tracker

In the latest version, I've added the possiblity to gather messages exchanged in Matrix channels. The #rust channel is public and its history is available to new members, but quite a few people in multiple 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, and discourse posts
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 2 days ago 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 `rust` mailing-list - discourse posts with the `#rust-sig` tag - this tracker In the latest version, I've added the possiblity to gather messages exchanged in Matrix channels. The `#rust` channel is public and its history is available to new members, but quite a few people in multiple 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, and discourse posts 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 2 days ago 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!

zbyszek commented

2026-09-10 17:20:23 +00:00

Owner

I'm fine with all three, maybe with the caveat that maybe stuff from the matrix channel should not be directly quoted with attribution, but instead loosely summarized. Informal conversations include banter and poor phrasing and typos, and we don't want to have those published and repeated.

decathorpe commented

2026-09-10 20:17:31 +00:00

Owner

Thanks for opening this ticket.

In general I'm OK with ingesting mailing list posts, discourse, and the ticket tracker(s) on forge, but rather "meh" on the Matrix channel history, so if I had to vote on them, it would be +1 for the former and ±0 for the latter. I'll post a link to this ticket on Matrix and ask other SIG members for opinions too, not everyone is subscribed to this ticket tracker.

Thanks for opening this ticket. In general I'm OK with ingesting mailing list posts, discourse, and the ticket tracker(s) on forge, but rather "meh" on the Matrix channel history, so if I had to vote on them, it would be +1 for the former and ±0 for the latter. I'll post a link to this ticket on Matrix and ask other SIG members for opinions too, not everyone is subscribed to this ticket tracker.

salimma commented

2026-09-10 20:46:07 +00:00

Member

I'm +0 on mailing list posts, discourse and ticket tracker, -1 on Matrix channel history

(Given the constraint of the Fedora AI policy which I generally disagree with)

I'm +0 on mailing list posts, discourse and ticket tracker, -1 on Matrix channel history (Given the constraint of the Fedora AI policy which I generally disagree with)