mirror of
https://github.com/simdjson/simdjson
synced 2026-06-08 17:27:07 +00:00
Daniel Lemire
57 lines
2.7 KiB
Markdown
57 lines
2.7 KiB
Markdown
# AI Usage Policy
|
|
|
|
Contributors can use whatever tools they would like to
|
|
craft their contributions, but there must be a **human in the loop**.
|
|
**Contributors must read and review all LLM-generated code or text before they
|
|
ask other project members to review it.** The contributor is always the author
|
|
and is fully accountable for their contributions. Contributors should be
|
|
sufficiently confident that the contribution is high enough quality that asking
|
|
for a review is a good use of scarce maintainer time, and they should be **able
|
|
to answer questions about their work** during review.
|
|
|
|
We expect that new contributors will be less confident in their contributions,
|
|
and our guidance to them is to **start with small contributions** that they can
|
|
fully understand to build confidence. We aspire to be a welcoming community
|
|
that helps new contributors grow their expertise, but learning involves taking
|
|
small steps, getting feedback, and iterating. Passing maintainer feedback to an
|
|
LLM doesn't help anyone grow, and does not sustain our community.
|
|
|
|
This policy includes, but is not limited to, the following kinds of
|
|
contributions:
|
|
|
|
- Code, usually in the form of a pull request
|
|
- Issues or security vulnerabilities
|
|
- Comments and feedback on pull requests
|
|
|
|
## Extractive Contributions
|
|
|
|
The reason for our "human-in-the-loop" contribution policy is that processing
|
|
patches, PRs, RFCs, and comments is not free -- it takes a lot of
|
|
maintainer time and energy to review those contributions! Sending the
|
|
unreviewed output of an LLM to open source project maintainers *extracts* work
|
|
from them in the form of design and code review, so we call this kind of
|
|
contribution an "extractive contribution".
|
|
|
|
## Transparency
|
|
|
|
For contributions involving significant AI assistance, we encourage you to disclose
|
|
its use and explain your process. If a submission appears to rely heavily on AI
|
|
without disclosure, we may doubt that the **human-in-the-loop** requirement has
|
|
been met. Please show awareness of your use of AI.
|
|
|
|
## Copyright
|
|
|
|
Artificial intelligence systems raise many questions around copyright that have
|
|
yet to be answered. Our policy on AI tools is similar to our copyright policy:
|
|
Contributors are responsible for ensuring that they have the right to
|
|
contribute code under the terms of our license, typically meaning that either
|
|
they, their employer, or their collaborators hold the copyright. Using AI tools
|
|
to regenerate copyrighted material does not remove the copyright, and
|
|
contributors are responsible for ensuring that such material does not appear in
|
|
their contributions. Contributions found to violate this policy will be removed
|
|
just like any other offending contribution.
|
|
|
|
## Reference
|
|
|
|
- [LLVM AI Tool Use Policy](https://discourse.llvm.org/t/rfc-llvm-ai-tool-policy-human-in-the-loop/89159)
|