alt Hacker NewsThat would imply it'd be fine for me to contribute AI assisted work if I did so politely and honestly. I just need to respect the maintainer's time and I'm golden, right?
That's not what the policy says, is it?
It's a shame, really. I had some GCC patches under development, and now I simply won't submit them. Not the first time I ended up sitting on perfectly good patches after running smack into such a policy either.
Replies
bigfishrunning • yesterday at 8:30 PM
This policy means that the GCC maintainers have defined "perfectly good" differently then you have.
➕ show 2 replies
LtWorf • yesterday at 10:40 PM
> I had some GCC patches under development, and now I simply won't submit them.
Of course, of course… I also had found a proof to fermat's last theorem that fits in a single page but I'm not publishing it as well :D
➕ show 1 reply
The thing they want is clear legal standing. If your submission is majority LLM generated, you can't really confirm that "your" code isn't a copy of something in the training set that has an incompatible license (or a clear copyright violation). That might not be a big deal for some projects, but being this is GNU and their entire identity is centered around free software and licensing, it's kind of a big deal to them.