---updated proposal v3.0 ---Using its power under Constitution section 4.1 (5), the project issues the following statement describing its current position on AI-assisted contributions. This statement describes the position of the project at the time it is adopted. That position may evolve as time passes without the need to resort to future general resolutions. The GR process remains available if the project needs a decision and cannot come to a consensus.
PreambleLLMs and its impact on society and environment is a hugely polarizing debate.
In this document, we mainly look at contributions using LLMs.LLMs have made a huge leap in language translations, but at the same time depending on big tech companies to provide this service is not a good idea. When it comes to generating code, we also need to consider how it weakens the idea of copyleft, unlike translations.
Enforcing copyleft requires us to depend on copyright law, if LLM generated code cannot be copyrighted, then LLM could be used to take out copyleft requirements from Free Software projects. But this is not something we can really control.
Basics1. If a Free Software LLM model is run locally, we are still in full control of it. But the cost of hardware to run these models makes access to such hardware difficult. So we cannot entirely insist on running this locally, similar to not insisting on use of Free Hardware Designs. So we will need to collectively run the models to make sure everyone have access to Free Software models in practice.
2. Public AI is AI as public infrastructure like highways, water, or electricity. An example to understand what Public AI looks like in practice is https://publicai.co, which is funded by Mozilla, the Future of Life Institute, and the Center for Cultural Innovation.
Public AI must use Free Software (Open Weight) models.Since we need a more precise definition, PublicAI.Co also complies with Open Source AI definition by OSI (https://opensource.org/ai).
For AI to be accessible to people, it has to be available easily to people, like Wikipedia or Lets Encrypt. Not for profit collaborations between multiple organizations and public funding is essential to keep it sustainable, though public funding is not a requirement. How we are going to fund such Public AI will evolve in the future.
So to evaluate an AI web service, we will use the definition of Open Source AI by OSI, but some requirements may be relaxed.
3. Public AI or Open Source AI or Free Software AI model running locally will be referred as Debian Free AI (DFAI).
4. At this point, we don't want to insist on training data being freely available, similar to how we don't insist on Free Hardware Designs. The challenges to practically being able to use the available data should be factored in. Similar to how costly it would be to produce hardware from Free Hardware Designs, even when training data is available, huge computing power is required to use it practically.
This point is a specific relaxation from the Open Source AI definition. Guidelines 1. Translations generated by DFAI can be accepted.2. Code / documentation generated by DFAI can also be accepted. Ideally it should preserve share alike / copyleft conditions of original code used in training, but how copyright law evolves is not in our control.
3. Contributions (code/bug reports/patches/documentation etc) assisted by DFAI should be accepted.
4. Any such contributions should also follow the generally accepted norms for contributions like ownership and quality.
The person submitting any such contributions generated or assisted by DFAI should take full responsibility for its quality.
---updated proposal v 3.0 --- On 8/10/26 11:01 AM, Marc Haber wrote:
On Mon, Aug 10, 2026 at 05:35:33AM +0530, Pirate Praveen wrote:---updated proposal---Using its power under Constitution section 4.1 (5), the project issues the following statement describing its current position on AI-assisted contributions. This statement describes the position of the project at the time it is adopted. That position may evolve as time passes without the need to resort to future general resolutions. The GR process remains available if the project needs a decision and cannot come to a consensus.LLMs have made a huge leap in language translations, but at the same time depending on big tech companies to provide this service is not a good idea. When it comes to generating code, we also need to consider how it weakens the idea of copyleft.1. Public AI is AI as public infrastructure like highways, water, or electricity. An example of Public AI is https://publicai.co, which is funded by Mozilla, the Future of Life Institute, and the Center for Cultural Innovation. It also complies with Open Source AI definition by OSI (https://opensource.org/ai). For AI to be accessible to people, it has to be available easily to people and not for profit collaborations between multiple organizations and public funding is essential to keep it sustainable.2. Public AI must use Free Software models.3. At this point, we don't want to insist on training data being freely available, similar to how we don't insist on Free Hardware Designs. The challenges to practically being able to use the available data should be factored in. Similar to how costly it would be to produce hardware from Free Hardware Designs, even when training data is available, huge computing power is required to use it practically.4. Translations generated by Public AI can be accepted.5. Code / documentation generated by Public AI can also be accepted if it preserves share alike / copyleft conditions of original code used in training.---updated proposal---I'd need seconds if people feel we need an option for allowing Public AI/Open Source AI. This would be closer to proposal A in practice, but could become more useful when the Free Software models mature and produce better results than currently.I could also get some help in making the draft better.I have been away from the discussion for a few days, but is it on purpose that this proposal does not shed a single word on AI assisted coding or bugfinding/fixing?Will that mean that AI assisted work on the actual code is freely allowed or fully forbidden?Greetings Marc
OpenPGP_0x8F53E0193B294B75.asc
Description: OpenPGP public key
OpenPGP_signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
