doc/guides/ai_policy: Make human communication mandatory#22433
Open
AnnsAnns wants to merge 1 commit into
Open
Conversation
maribu
reviewed
Jul 2, 2026
crasbe
reviewed
Jul 3, 2026
crasbe
approved these changes
Jul 3, 2026
maribu
approved these changes
Jul 3, 2026
Member
|
Not really an "API" change, but I think the "needs two ACKs" rule for breaking API changes should apply here as well, so I just abused the label. |
Co-authored-by: Marian Buschsieweke <maribu@users.noreply.github.com>
ae94968 to
8cf937a
Compare
Member
Author
I agree, do we have that in our policy though or is this vibe based? |
Member
|
I did not find any written documentation about our process with regard to API changes last time I checked. We do have some documentation with regard to changing |
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Contribution description
Recently we have had a wave of new first time contributors, which would be great in theory if it wasn't for the fact that at the same time we have seen a rise of heavy LLM usage. While our current policy mostly handles that, something that I personally did not expect to be such a huge problem is the over-reliance on LLM output for human to human communication. Some PRs that appear fairly alright by our LLM policy standards then hit you with walls of clearly AI generated texts in the comments when trying to review the PR, making the reviewing process extremely frustrating and rage inducing, feeling more like human to llm communication. And I don't need to be a prompter for somebody else, I can also prompt claude myself 💢
Testing procedure
make doc-starlightIssues/PRs references
Declaration of AI-Tools / LLMs usage:
AI-Tools / LLMs that were used are: