Fuck AI, but a respectable stance.
And then you have the ShareX developer, using a screenshot of an AI response to respond to a GitHub issue.
And then you have the ShareX developer, using a screenshot of an AI response to respond to a GitHub issue.
based sharex dev, every foss dev should be legally allowed to shoot one issue creator each year
Based. It’s entirely opt in.
deleted by creator
Seems like a common sense approach.
yeah. It’s basically “don’t commit poorly written code” (AI or not)
So far the best AI tool use policy I’ve read, specially this bit:
Your PR body should be providing context to other developers about why a change was made, and if your name is on it, we want your words and explanations, not an LLM’s. If you can’t explain what the LLM did, we are not interested in the change.
Well I wish the AI would fix the Schedules Direct problem
I love this approach - clear and concise rules. They are being realistic about AI created code making it into their codebase, while setting some guidelines.
So far the best AI tool use policy I’ve read, specially this bit:
Your PR body should be providing context to other developers about why a change was made, and if your name is on it, we want your words and explanations, not an LLM’s. If you can’t explain what the LLM did, we are not interested in the change.





