Big +1 It's probably hard to put in clear terms (and forgive my English), but I think that the criteria should be even stricter than "contribute only what you understand":
"Do not contribute anything that you wouldn't have been fully capable of writing on your own without any AI assistance." or "Contribute only what you could have done by yourself without any AI assistance." Tthis makes it more likely that you will be able to fix or improve your work if needed. On Tue, Jun 23, 2026 at 1:47 AM Nyall Dawson via QGIS-Developer <[email protected]> wrote: > > Hi lists, > > Following recent discussions and conflict within the PostGIS community, I > would like us to consider tightening our AI submission policy to hopefully > avoid similar conflict arising in our community. > > I would propose that we move away from our current (quite permissive) "human > in the loop" policy (see > https://github.com/qgis/QGIS-Enhancement-Proposals/blob/master/qep-408-ai-tool-policy.md > ) to something more restrictive, such as what the GDAL project has done. See > https://github.com/OSGeo/gdal/blob/33399bf734f48a6727050ccd13a43575d43f6bf4/doc/source/community/ai_tool_policy.rst). > > In short, GDAL's policy is: > > Contributors can make limited use of LLMs for contributions in GDAL, subject > to details mentioned below: > > - Human contributors must be the primary author(s) of GDAL contributions > - All contributions including code, ticket comments, and commit messages > should be fully understood by the author(s) submitting them to the project. > - Submission of vibe-coded contributions is banned. > - LLMs may only be used as an improved auto-completion mechanism, or for > repeated tasks (mechanical refactoring) that could potentially be completed > with a deterministic algorithm. > - Human-coordinated or uncoordinated (OpenClaw, etc) use of agents for > submission of contributions to the GDAL repository is banned. > - Any LLM usage must be indicated by ticket label, comment, or commit message > indication and account for what was written by whom/what. > - The contributing human author is ultimately responsible for every line of > code, comment, or mailing list interaction they initiate, and all of it is > subject to the project's :ref:`code_of_conduct`. > - The typical high verbosity of LLM code and text is actively discouraged. > More code is more code to maintain. High verbosity contribution (tickets, > code, messages, etc) will be seen as indication of LLM-generated content when > not labeled otherwise and may be ignored, closed, left unmerged, or removed > at maintainers' discretion. > > > I personally think a combination of GDAL policy + borrowing the "contribute > only what you understand" term from Godot's current policy (see > https://contributing.godotengine.org/en/latest/pull_requests/pull_request_guidelines.html#ai-assisted-contributions > could be a good step forward. Specifically this clause: > > Contribute only what you understand > Only submit code that you fully understand and are prepared to explain to a > maintainer. This especially applies if you implement the idea of another > person, copy code from elsewhere, or if you use AI to assist you with your > contribution. In all of these cases, you must disclose which part of your > submission wasn't fully authored by you. > > Thoughts? > > Nyall > > > _______________________________________________ > QGIS-Developer mailing list > [email protected] > List info: https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer > Unsubscribe: https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer -- Alessandro Pasotti QCooperative: www.qcooperative.net ItOpen: www.itopen.it _______________________________________________ QGIS-Developer mailing list [email protected] List info: https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer Unsubscribe: https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer
