On Mon, Jun 30, 2025 at 10:32 PM Junio C Hamano <gitster@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > Following the example set by QEMU folks, let's explicitly forbid use > of genAI tools until the copyright and license situations become > more clear. Here is what QEMU folks say in their commit to adopt > such a rule: > > The DCO requires contributors to assert they have the right to > contribute under the designated project license. Given the lack > of consensus on the licensing of AI code generator output, it is > not considered credible to assert compliance with the DCO clause > (b) or (c) where a patch includes such generated code. Here they forbid licensing any "AI code generator output" with the DCO. > and it applies equally well to ours. > > Signed-off-by: Junio C Hamano <gitster@xxxxxxxxx> > --- > Documentation/SubmittingPatches | 17 +++++++++++++++++ > 1 file changed, 17 insertions(+) > > diff --git c/Documentation/SubmittingPatches w/Documentation/SubmittingPatches > index 958e3cc3d5..63fd10ce39 100644 > --- c/Documentation/SubmittingPatches > +++ w/Documentation/SubmittingPatches > @@ -439,6 +439,23 @@ highlighted above. > Only capitalize the very first letter of the trailer, i.e. favor > "Signed-off-by" over "Signed-Off-By" and "Acked-by:" over "Acked-By". > > + > +[[ai]] > +=== Use of AI content generators > + > +This project requires that contributors certify that their > +contributions are made under Developer's Certificate of Origin 1.1, > +which in turn means that contributors must understand the full > +provenance of what they are contributing. With AI content generators, > +the copyright or license status of their output is ill-defined, without > +any generally accepted legal foundation. Here we would forbid licensing any "AI content generator" output, not just AI code generator output. So what we would forbid might be more general than what QEMU folks forbid. For example they might still accept a new logo, or even commit messages, made using an AI while we wouldn't. > +Hence, the project asks that contributors refrain from using AI content > +generators on changes that are submitted to the project. Here it looks like using an AI capable of generating content to just check code that would be submitted could also be forbidden. I don't think this is what we want, so I think we might want to reword this. > +Contributions in which use of AI is either known or suspected may not > +be accepted. Here also "use of AI" might forbid checking what we submit using any AI tool.
