You misunderstood my comment. I am not suggesting that you be forced to provide guarantees.

By defending this legislation you are.

No. I am suggesting that you should not be producing goods for public consumption unless you are able to provide guarantees.

Noone's going to force you to provide guarantees for goods you did not produce.

Are you suggesting it or saying it should be illegal? Again, by defending these laws you want it to be forced.

I never said anything about software I didn’t produce, should I interpret this as you agreeing that you will force me to provide guarantees for open source software I do make?

> should I interpret this as you agreeing that you will force me to provide guarantees for open source software I do make?

Yes. However, the way you use the term "force me", at least to me, implies an unjust enforcement of a law, post-publishing that was not made clear pre-publishing.

It’s unjust if you believe force is only justified in response to force, which you do not. Glad we cleared that up.

You seem very intent on labelling legal obligations as being forced to do something. That, at least to me, is a clear mischaracterization of the issue at hand.

I'm starting to believe that "no guarantees" should be explicitly banned. You release software, you should guarantee it.

For what use case?

Every reasonably viable use case.

This is entirely divorced from reality, then. You'd have to make the code resilient to failure modes specific to operating environments you're entirely unaware of while authoring the code. E.g. someone takes your code and cross-compiles it for use as part of one of several daemons running in an embedded system on an architecture you never tested on, and it leaks memory in that environment due to how to OS allocates memory there. I'm not thrilled with this example I just made up, but I hope it captures the distinction between writing an algorithm and deploying a full solution into a known environment.

The idea that software engineers can 'guarantee' against this is fantasy and precisely what integration testing is for. It has to be the case that those who deploy the code take responsibility for its behavior, not the original authors, since only those deploying have the full picture of the system.

Would you like to propose a method for guaranteeing your software is bug free?

The proposed law does not require software to be bug free.