Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Godot will no longer accept AI-authored code contributions

pcgamer.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

171–180 of 419 posts

Re: Godot will no longer accept AI-authored code contributions

#171

Post by reactordev »

TomasBM wrote: post #7

It's a fair policy. Getting those verbose, AI-authored walls of text is very annoying, especially when you're expected to thoroughly review it. It's like a denial-of-service attack on the human mind. I can only imagine how frustrating this can get in open projects that get a lot of contributions. However, I don't think this will discourage AI-based coding at all. In fact, I see two potential outcomes of these policie…

My agents operate on their own branch for a feature, they commit code changes after each step or phase with a description of what was changed, why, and what’s left.

This helps with PR reviews as it prevents a giant wall of text but it’s still verbose. However doing it this way cuts down on the wall of text at the expense of increased PR frequency.

Re: Godot will no longer accept AI-authored code contributions

#172

Post by theragra »

brettermeier wrote: post #68

Do those AI contributors really think they are helping out? Don't they get, that they are destroying such projects with their "work"? Why do they spend money for stuff nobody wants and gets rejected. I don't get it... Don't these people have any hobbies? Or are these free-roaming OpenClaw instances that have been forgotten by their creator and are now doing their own thing?

Well, I tried to contribute using AI. Brew and far2 accepted my work, KDE spectacle maintainers did not answer.

Both PR were tiny, not different from human PR. I still believe these were valuable additions, and obviously some maintainers think the same.

Re: Godot will no longer accept AI-authored code contributions

#173

Post by IshKebab »

localhoster wrote: post #8

While I agree with the general message, and wish it will eventually radiate to cooperations as well, it is obviously a decision driven by feelings, not logic. The idea that you can't trust code that was generated by heavy users of AI, because _they_ don't understand it enough to fix it, is false, because they can use AI to fix it. In general, I have hard time understanding how one might even block other contributors…

> they can use AI to fix it

AI isn't some all powerful programming oracle that can do anything. Sometimes it doesn't do things right and if you're just blindly copying and pasting its mistakes to some poor reviewer that's going to piss them off.

Also what's the point? If you're just relaying messages to an AI what do you add?

I'm guessing you've never been on the receiving end of this behaviour.

Re: Godot will no longer accept AI-authored code contributions

#174

Post by throwfaraway135 »

nkrisc wrote: post #161
throwfaraway135 wrote: post #144

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I get that, but again this seems like a quality problem. As for commitment a simple sorting algorithm which prioritizes repeat contributors should solve that. Google Godot drama 2024, for some top-notch community mismanagement classes.

All I found is something to do with Discord. Been using Godot for years I have no idea what drama you’re talking about.

As far as I can remember. There was a pro LGBT tweet that some people didn't like. And the moderator decided to blanket ban everyone who disagreed with the tweet. Some of the banned people had reasonable objections like: regardless if they agree with something or not politics and OS should be separated, and were still banned, including on GitHub. Others had objections also shared with the Godot founder and were still banned. There were some other things also but can't remember the details.

Re: Godot will no longer accept AI-authored code contributions

#175

Post by JodieBenitez »

nurbl wrote: post #162
JodieBenitez wrote: post #119

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Let me tell you a story: I use agents at work. Not to add more useless features, not in a let-loose way, not so that I can slack all day but to produce better output. Think performance optimizations, security fixes, better use of underlying frameworks, produce better documentation, get useful hints from the code base, that kind of thing. In a word, to produce objectively better software. that is my honor: giving the…

You don't think there are any other aspects worth considering than the mere quality of the code produced?

Sure, but these aspects are rarely brought up by my opponents. And we can discuss them ad lib, but there is no coming back for me.

Re: Godot will no longer accept AI-authored code contributions

#176

Post by skydhash »

felix-the-cat wrote: post #165
adamddev1 wrote: post #153

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There's this crazy narrative that everyone starts parroting, saying the days of writing code yourself are over, now we have to use agents for everything. No, we don't have to. We can just write code ourselves. (My condolences to people who have jobs where AI is mandated.)

I'm in that boat - my current employer recently announced that they are tracking AI usage across the company and if you're not using enough AI you will be "replaced by someone who does".

Your employee is very late on this one. Other companies have tried that and have already been burned by people tokenmaxxing.

Re: Godot will no longer accept AI-authored code contributions

#177

Post by x3ro »

someonebaggy wrote: post #77
captainbland wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> It's like a denial-of-service attack on the human mind. I think this may be an example of deliberate hostile design, attempting to force users to adopt LLM based solutions to then summarise the vast output. Pushing back against AI contributions as such in this context makes sense, especially in software with an existing proven track record of great value delivery like Godot.

There's no chance that anyone saw that far ahead in the future and planned it. It's emergent behaviour.

Who says anything about „this far in the future“? It’s enough for Anthropic et al to realize this one or two model versions ago, see it as a strategic advantage and push for that behavior.

Re: Godot will no longer accept AI-authored code contributions

#178

Post by chrisjj »

TomasBM wrote: post #7

It's a fair policy. Getting those verbose, AI-authored walls of text is very annoying, especially when you're expected to thoroughly review it. It's like a denial-of-service attack on the human mind. I can only imagine how frustrating this can get in open projects that get a lot of contributions. However, I don't think this will discourage AI-based coding at all. In fact, I see two potential outcomes of these policie…

> I personally wouldn't care if it was AI-generated or not, as long as the content fit the latter category.

Perhaps reconsider "If your feedback on PRs is just being absorbed by a machine and not going towards mentoring a potential future maintainer..."

Re: Godot will no longer accept AI-authored code contributions

#179

Post by timacles »

mellosouls wrote: post #56

Underlying announcement might be a better link: https://godotengine.org/article/contribution-policy-2026/ I predict this won't last long in any extreme version in any significant open source repo. Banning AI-slop is one thing, but AI as a properly used co-programmer is becoming more and more capable and shutting out well-guided AI will enable competitors who don't to edge and then power ahead. There are obviously pro…

Competitors … in open source?

I predict any project that allows AI will slowly degrade in quality

Re: Godot will no longer accept AI-authored code contributions

#180

Post by chrisjj »

mcphage wrote: post #164
maybewhenthesun wrote: post #146

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Dingdingding, we have a winner. The main use of such a policy is to be able to just close those giant wall-of-text PRs and have something to point to when people start to scream it's not fair.

> when people start to scream it's not fair Or LLMs, as we have seen.

Or, who knows, the "AI" might gain sufficient intelligence to read the policy...
Post reply on HN