Linux

I am locking the thread because I consider this cherry picking comments from KDE maintainers misinformation. Let's wait and see where they go... The discussion as to include gen AI code, in which ways, how much, etc. is something that many projects (if not all) are undergoing. Let's be respectful to their open decision processes! This respectfulness needs to be regardless of whether we agree or not with what they do. Once they make a decision, sure, go ahead with flaming commentaries and endorsing alternatives or forks (if they appeared)

Guess I'll stay on xfce...

I switched to Niri a few months ago as an experiment but now I guess I will not go back to KDE anytime soon

It starts with "oh, just clean up any code generated" and "you must understand what your code does" and then in a decade that person won't remember how to code at all because they self-lobotomized themselves for the convenience.

If slop coding is so great why is everyone so adamant about hiding it from users?

If you're not willing to disclose something, maybe take that as a hint.

The stupidity of bandwagoners is on full display in this comment section.

time to stop donating then. Ai crap results in death by a thousand cuts.

You cannot tell from the code necessarily anyway so anti-AI policies are hard to enforce. In the end the developer (or AI wielding human) is responsible for the code quality and its license which is what matters. All this discussion feels just like the usual culture war dividing the community. I’m more concerned about the intentions of people adding fuel to the fire.

the policy in question:

The golden rule for LLM usage in KDE is Don't be lazy:

1. Don't try to use a tool to replace your own judgment, interpersonal communication, or learning process.

2. Don't take unsustainable shortcuts.

3. Don't avoid growing as a person.

The result will be poor-quality work that eventually becomes someone else's problem.

Nobody in KDE should know if you use an LLM — not because you're concealing it, but because your usage of it produces output indistinguishable from what you could produce yourself. Contributions with obvious and lazy LLM usage may be ignored or closed.

Using an LLM to generate contributions

KDE follows a "human in the loop" principle: you must be making decisions and adjustments beyond mere prompting. The output must express your unique humanity in some way.

1. Don't be a "meat proxy". For example:
2. Don't submit throwaway LLM-created changes as a "first draft or proof-of-concept for maintainers to improve".
3. Don't submit "vibe-coded" changes you don't understand and couldn't make yourself.
4. Don't disclose LLM usage as a way of trying to excuse the potential errors or poor quality of a contribution that you haven't put much effort into.
5. Don't add "Assisted-by: [some LLM]" tags to your commits; it's just free advertising for the LLM's provider.

(emphasis original, except for the fourth bullet point)