>>>>> On Tue, 27 Feb 2024, Rich Freeman wrote:

> On Tue, Feb 27, 2024 at 9:45 AM Michał Górny <mgorny@gentoo.org> wrote:
>> 
>> Given the recent spread of the "AI" bubble, I think we really need to
>> look into formally addressing the related concerns.

First of all, I fully support mgorny's proposal.

>> 1. Copyright concerns.

> I do think it makes sense to consider some of this.

> However, I feel like the proposal is redundant with the existing
> requirement to signoff on the DCO, which says:

>>>> By making a contribution to this project, I certify that:

>>>> 1. The contribution was created in whole or in part by me, and
>>>> I have the right to submit it under the free software license
>>>> indicated in the file; or

>>>> 2. The contribution is based upon previous work that, to the best of
>>>> my knowledge, is covered under an appropriate free software license,
>>>> and I have the right under that license to submit that work with
>>>> modifications, whether created in whole or in part by me, under the
>>>> same free software license (unless I am permitted to submit under a
>>>> different license), as indicated in the file; or

>>>> 3. The contribution is a license text (or a file of similar nature),
>>>> and verbatim distribution is allowed; or

>>>> 4. The contribution was provided directly to me by some other person
>>>> who certified 1., 2., 3., or 4., and I have not modified it.

I have been thinking about this aspect too. Certainly there is some
overlap with our GLEP 76 policy, but I don't think that it is redundant.

I'd rather see it as a (much needed) clarification how to deal with AI
generated code. All the better if the proposal happens to agree with
policies that are already in place.

Ulrich