@jwildeboer But that isn't a fair example, either. Failed patches are not expected to be published, but the final one is. Private branches are neither expected, and the main one(s) are not required but nice to have.

The equivalence here would be if you do some trial and error with the training data, and by the end you only publish the good one.

However, not publishing the training data is more like publishing the Linux kernel as a blob and the minimum to build 3rd party modules (kind of).

@jwildeboer Hmm, let's see the blog post, but that argument sounds a bit like "why do you want the sources if you have the binary already compiled".

I know, it's not exactly the same because with the AI model you can modify it having the model only.

But what about other aspects like being able to inspect/audit how it has been trained? Being able to reproduce the same training to check that the model corresponds with the training that it is supposed to have?