On Thursday, 12 March 2026 06:26:49 UTC Bastien Guerry wrote: > Ihor Radchenko <[email protected]> writes: > > 1. First-time contributors should be discouraged to use LLM > > 2. The only exception to (1) is when they declare that > > > > a. They are experienced LLM users > > b. They confirm that they have reviewed the LLM-generated code and > > > > *also the code it changes* > > > > 3. Contributors who wrote their own patches in the past may use LLM for > > > > smallish patches. No new substantial features. > > > > 4. Regular contributors may be trusted to use LLM assist for new > > > > features. They are probably experienced enough to review the > > generated code and make sure that it is reasonable. > > Org could also set a policy of requiring that patch submitters commit to > "maintain" the change they submit for a definite period of time. > "Maintain" in the sense that if git blame traces a problem back to the > commit(s) they submitted, Org maintainers are entitled to ping them on > the mailing list and ask them to fix it.
Because it is impossible to know if, or to what extent, LLM has been involved, and also because any human contribution/action usually comes with subsequent accountability, reminding people that there will be some follow-up period is an astute move. > > Contributing is a learning process, and "owning" your contributions is > another: in my experience, both as a maintainer and as a contributor, > both processes are important.
