Debian decides not to decide on AI-generated contributions

Post by codebolt » Wed, Mar 11, 2026, 8:12 AM UTC

lukan wrote: post #260

gwbas1c wrote: post #126

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I'd MUCH rather see a holistic embrace and integration of these tools into our ecosystems. Telling people "no AI!" (even if very well defined on what that means) is toothless against people with little regard for making the world (or just one specific repo) a better place. That doesn't address the controversy because you are a reasonable person assuming that other people using AI are reasonable like you, and know h…

I see the solution as only engaging with reasonable persons and ignore the rest. And the problem is filtering them out. That is real work that can be draining and demoralizing as unreasonable persons usually have their sad story why they are the way they are, but you cannot do therapy or coaching for random strangers while trying to get a project going. So if people contribute good things, engage with them. If they c…

Post by lukan » Wed, Mar 11, 2026, 8:17 AM UTC

codebolt wrote: post #261

lukan wrote: post #260

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I see the solution as only engaging with reasonable persons and ignore the rest. And the problem is filtering them out. That is real work that can be draining and demoralizing as unreasonable persons usually have their sad story why they are the way they are, but you cannot do therapy or coaching for random strangers while trying to get a project going. So if people contribute good things, engage with them. If they c…

There must be a mechanism to rate the person submitting the PR. Anyone that wants to submit code to a well-known repo would first need to build a demonstrable history of making high-quality contributions to lesser known projects. I'm not very familiar with the open source scene but I'd find it very surprising if such a mechanism was not already in place. Seems like an obvious solution to the problem of vibe coders su…

Post by project2501a » Wed, Mar 11, 2026, 8:30 AM UTC

PeterStuer wrote: post #262

In 2025 it might have still been a discussion, but at this point, projects refusing any ai use for contributions or either just virtue signaling and willingly turning a blind eye, or have just chosen to silent quit. It is over. Everyone is using AI (sure, you are the exception. For now).

Post by happymellon » Wed, Mar 11, 2026, 8:48 AM UTC

codebolt wrote: post #261

lukan wrote: post #260

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I see the solution as only engaging with reasonable persons and ignore the rest. And the problem is filtering them out. That is real work that can be draining and demoralizing as unreasonable persons usually have their sad story why they are the way they are, but you cannot do therapy or coaching for random strangers while trying to get a project going. So if people contribute good things, engage with them. If they c…

There must be a mechanism to rate the person submitting the PR. Anyone that wants to submit code to a well-known repo would first need to build a demonstrable history of making high-quality contributions to lesser known projects. I'm not very familiar with the open source scene but I'd find it very surprising if such a mechanism was not already in place. Seems like an obvious solution to the problem of vibe coders su…

Post by robinsonb5 » Wed, Mar 11, 2026, 10:17 AM UTC

cortesoft wrote: post #242

gwbas1c wrote: post #126

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I'd MUCH rather see a holistic embrace and integration of these tools into our ecosystems. Telling people "no AI!" (even if very well defined on what that means) is toothless against people with little regard for making the world (or just one specific repo) a better place. That doesn't address the controversy because you are a reasonable person assuming that other people using AI are reasonable like you, and know h…

How is an AI policy going to help prevent bad faith actors, though? People who are doing those harmful things with AI aren’t going to stop because of a policy. They are just going to lie and not admit their submissions are AI generated. At that point, you will still have to review the code and reject it if it is bad quality, just like you had to without an AI policy. The policy doesn’t make it any easier to filter ou…