Good evening, I've noticed recent mentions of "vibe coding" - rapidly coding a solution in a short period of time with most of the code being completely AI generated - on the forum lately. I've also noticed that some of these vibe coded features have already been merged into our code base, and others claim to have plans to create pull requests to add their weekend AI adventures to the code base in an effort to give back.
Given that there are a limited number of developers who are available to review the incoming changes, and even fewer that have the necessary specific knowledge of the project, I think it's important to take steps to protect the integrity and maintainability of LinuxCNC. The project has hard earned reputation of reliability, and while there will always be bugs, that reputation shouldn't be ruined by poorly understood or insufficiently vetted contributions, regardless of intent. I wonder if we should take a stance similar to the one FreeCAD has taken? https://blog.freecad.org/2026/03/16/rules-regarding-ai-generated-patches/ This would be a starting point that would likely need to be expanded upon to fit our specific workflow and standards. I do think AI can be a useful tool in the toolbox. It can be valuable when used appropriately by experienced developers. However, in its current state, it is also capable of producing code that is superficially plausible but fundamentally incorrect, incomplete, or misaligned with the project. When the person who submits it fades back into the bushes, it becomes even harder to maintain. At a minimum, I think any contribution should meet our standards, be maintainable, and be fully understood by the person submitting it. Contributions that don't meet those standards should not be merged. -Greg _______________________________________________ Emc-developers mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/emc-developers
