The patch author, while claiming LLM discussions are (implied "hidden") in "internal mailing lists", didn't link to the "constructive and collaborative" conversation that indeed occurred (publicly). That seems a sort of dishonesty itself.

https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/emacs-devel/2026-06/msg00...

In a different thread about a different LLM-generated package, here's RMS himself:

> • As a disclaimer it was generated with LLM. I think ELPA has a > • prudent policy to not allow this for now until there is legal > • clarify, but does this apply to nonGNU-ELPA also?

RMS: It does apply, for the time being. It is not a final decision, it is tentative.

(link: https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/emacs-devel/2026-05/msg00...)

GNU (and/or the Emacs project in particular) does not seem to be acting in ludditic or reactionary ways, but thoughtful ones.