On Wed, Jul 8, 2026 at 4:07 PM Andreas Enge <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> Am Wed, Jul 08, 2026 at 02:59:40PM +0000 schrieb Greg Hogan:
> > The GCD process does not preclude the project from temporarily
> > rejecting LLM-authored legally significant contributions while waiting
> > on legal guidance from the GNU Foundation. This is a perfectly
> > reasonable step to take while we improve our tracking of copyright
> > status. This would need to be added to the user documentation and pull
> > request template.
>
> In the absence of consensus, who would be legitimate to add non-
> consensual regulations to the manual? I would argue that this would
> need another GCD, since the topic is controversial; and then we
> perfectly go in circles.

Anyone could contribute this change. We do not need a consensus
document to remain a GNU project and follow GNU legal guidance. That
is preexisting consensus. It would require a GCD to leave GNU. And
apart from being preexisting consensus and a legally necessity, I have
yet to hear anyone express any disagreement for doing this
precautionary restriction. This does not require a de facto permanent
ban on AI.

Reply via email to