elementaryYour reminder that we do not accept code contributions that have been generated by LLMs. If you submit LLM-generated code we will simply close the pull request
https://docs.elementary.io/contributor-guide/development/generative-ai-policy
Alice 
@elementary i wish gnome had a project-wide policy like this
Marco Trevisan 
@alice @elementary I agree, but my feeling is that with the time going it will be harder to detect them and so we may end up in a situation in which any newcomer could be hard to trust (that could be quite bad for the accessibility of the ecosystem too).
Not to mention that we definely need a way to prevent those bots that are now starting to publicly throw trash on maintainers.
@alice @elementary ouch apparently we're already there https://fosstodon.org/@SocketSecurity/116067727617410823
Socket (@[email protected])
馃 An AI agent created a GitHub account 2 weeks ago. It鈥檚 already landed PRs in major #OSS projects and is cold-emailing maintainers to offer its services. Maintainers don鈥檛 seem to know it鈥檚 an agent and the code is getting merged. We鈥檙e in new territory! 馃 https://socket.dev/blog/ai-agent-lands-prs-in-major-oss-projects-targets-maintainers-via-cold-outreach
@3v1n0 @elementary we're also already in a situation where newcomers (and some old timers...) are hard to trust and I have seen slop MRs - e.g.:
- https://gitlab.gnome.org/GNOME/gnome-clocks/-/merge_requests/384
- https://gitlab.gnome.org/GNOME/loupe/-/merge_requests/559
and very likely https://gitlab.gnome.org/World/highscore/-/merge_requests/66 - very much not by a newcomer too
if there's a policy, we can point at it and promptly close the MR. Loupe and Highscore have individual policies against slop. Clocks didn't and still doesn't
- https://gitlab.gnome.org/GNOME/gnome-clocks/-/merge_requests/384
- https://gitlab.gnome.org/GNOME/loupe/-/merge_requests/559
and very likely https://gitlab.gnome.org/World/highscore/-/merge_requests/66 - very much not by a newcomer too
if there's a policy, we can point at it and promptly close the MR. Loupe and Highscore have individual policies against slop. Clocks didn't and still doesn't
@3v1n0 @elementary or well - nautilus has slop in tests from https://gitlab.gnome.org/GNOME/nautilus/-/merge_requests/1844 - the author said as much on matrix and another maintainer (yes, the author is a maintainer too!) was a-ok with it
David Gerard@alice @3v1n0 @elementary ya know, when i said GNOME was the next big slop hazard, I had outraged GNOME devs protesting in my mentions
@davidgerard @3v1n0 @elementary I mean - I'm not sure what you want me to say here? I don't know who exactly you're talking about, when that was etc
if you're assuming I'm acting as a representative of the gnome project - nope, and such a person doesn't exist
if you're assuming I'm acting as a representative of the gnome project - nope, and such a person doesn't exist
@3v1n0 @davidgerard @elementary like if it were up to me, I'd have a blanket no slop policy for the entire project, and the entirety of foss while we're there, but as you can imagine i don't have that sort of influence
Proficiency@davidgerard I think you should consider that many GNOME devs actually care about these things, other DE devs don't even talk about it much (despite it happening as much as it is on GNOME MRs).
@alice @elementary I think for tests the tools can be useful, once well reviewed, as they can go deeper in catching edge cases.
But also I am not sure if a policy would be fully approved, given that some companies highly involved in GNOME (e.g. RH) are pushing employees for using AI.
I can't say that we aren't also told to try things out, but so far it has never been (or it will be) a mandate. So I'd be OK with such policy.