There may be violent agreement here... > On Mon, 2026-02-23 at 11:59 +0000, Matthew Brett via NumPy-Discussion > wrote: [snip]
>> Back to the options - 1) don't worry about it because it's not >> important, or 2) put guards in place to make sure the contributor has >> carefully and personally reviewed the PR for copyright concerns, and >> review often to make sure these are effective or 3) delay allowing >> large AI-generated blocks of code until we can see a way forward for >> copyright. >> >> It's clear I think that some of us are in the 1) case - don't worry >> about it. I'm absolutely not in that camp, but hey. All I'm saying >> is - if we're in camp 1, we should make that clear. > > > To me this seems very exaggerated. Just because we don't put one issue > (of multiple we have in practice) into the dead center of such a policy > text (or PR template) doesn't equate to ignoring it? > Both policies Ralf brought up include a statement about copyright. We > still could decide to link out from there for the curious readers or > adding guidelines somewhere when and where we should ask more > questions. > > I believe all I said was that I don't want to overshoot and worry most > contributors (because yeah, I truly think for the majority of PRs there > is just not much concern). > Maybe we can word-smith something that strikes a good balance there. > And yeah, we probably disagree where that balance lies. > But if adding a brief note on copyright concerns in the policy is the > same as saying "it's not important", I have no idea where to go?! I think the third option suggested by Matthew is reasonable, at least for new contributors, though I would phrase it like that for large AI-generated code we need to be able to trust the contributor *and* have evidence of due diligence. Let's try to move towards wondering how to include this in a policy. As Sebastian noted, most contributors will not read the policy, so at some level, what we write will be aimed as much as maintainers, to give guidance about when to ask for evidence. But I do agree with Sebastian that we should not let the extremes stop us from adopting a workflow that works for the general case, where a first contribution is small. -- Marten _______________________________________________ NumPy-Discussion mailing list -- [email protected] To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected] https://mail.python.org/mailman3//lists/numpy-discussion.python.org Member address: [email protected]
