I would prefer to keep the ipfire-2.x repository on Github. For me,
Github is much easier to work with and search.
If it helps, I volunteer to keep an eye on push requests, respond to
them as needed, and then close them.
Jon
------ Original Message ------
From "Michael Tremer" <[email protected]>
To "Stefan Schantl" <[email protected]>
Cc [email protected]
Date 1/26/2026 11:13:56 AM
Subject Re: An AI Usage Policy for IPFire
Hello,
Sorry for not replying any earlier…
I wanted to write up some more thoughts about basically closing our GitHub
account. This has been a long standing thought that I had since a lot of Open
Source projects have taken this step. Possibly for other reasons, but I don’t
believe that we are benefitting much from our GitHub account at all.
So initially we started this because we wanted to make sure that IPFire will be
available to more people. A GitHub search won’t show us unless we have a copy
of our repository, and it was also intended as a backup in case our Git server
is down for a moment.
The backup is probably the only thing that is still a valid argument to me.
Otherwise, we have no option to disable PRs and we have seen a lot of people
who have always been ignoring any hints or even willingly went against it and
still opened any issues and PRs there. This has just created extra work with no
noticeable outcome.
Other open source projects are prominently moving away from GitHub because of
Microsoft’s influence and although this argument is not as strong for as
because we are not using GitHub as our primary space for any sources, I agree
with the intentions of those projects.
Initially I thought that we should only remove the ipfire-2.x repository, but
now looking at it again, I don’t see why else we would host anything there
whatsoever. Currently we have libloc and ddns copied there, too:
https://github.com/orgs/ipfire/repositories
Does anyone have any feelings about this? Should we just close it and therefore
the whole PR problem in the test is resolving itself somewhat?
-Michael
On 25 Jan 2026, at 17:38, Stefan Schantl <[email protected]> wrote:
Hello Michael,
thanks for working this out.
I've read through the document and it is very good written. Similar to
Adolf I would clarify a bit more what a "Pull request" is and what kind
of requests we accept and which not.
Best regards,
-Stefan
Hello everyone,
While eating my lunch today I stumbled over the AI Usage Policy that
the Ghostty project has come up with. I quite liked it and I think
that IPFire should also have a policy for AI usage in place. We have
not received such an overwhelming amount of AI-generated patches
unlike Ghostty and cURL, but we have received some that have been
very low quality and when asked questions, the person who submitted
this patch raised his hands and dropped out. This is just a waste of
time for everyone involved.
This policy that I have slightly adapted for IPFire demands that any
kind of AI usage is allowed, but has to be disclosed. The point is to
avoid any kind of low-quality, time-wasting submissions. I too
believe that we should make this known upfront so that we can all be
on the same page and make the job easy for us in case we need to
reject any kind of patch submission.
On the other hand, the policy is encouraging AI usage as there are
indeed tasks where AI can help. But just because it is AI-generated
does not mean that something is good.
I would like you all to have a look at this and see if this is
working for you as well or if you would like to have any changes made
to it:
https://www.ipfire.org/docs/devel/ai-policy
All the best,
-Michael
