Hi Ludo and Greg, On 2026-06-18 at 22:26+02:00, Ludovic Courtès wrote: > On 2026-06-18 at 17:56+00:00, Greg Hogan wrote: > > "The project will not use nor encourage use of genAI to author code or > > packages, to review code, to produce artwork, translations, or any > > other artifacts. These prohibitions do not constrain exploratory > > analysis, running guix commands, or authoring non-legally significant > > contributions. This is to ensure the contributor has a valid copyright > > claim on the code. For example, this includes code less than > > 15-line-long, or package definitions that are evidently not creative, > > similar to those that guix import and similar tools might produce." > > OK, sounds good. I find the second sentence ambiguous and would be > tempted to summarize it as: > > Thus rule does not prevent use of genAI for exploratory analysis or to > produce non-legally-significant contributions. > > (“Running guix commands” is fine, whether or not it’s happening via an > agent, so I’m not sure what you had in mind.)
Note that the context of legal significance is per-person, not patch series, and I've been suspecting the 15 number is for GNU-style C code. I would not consent to invitations of repeated LLM-generated 14-line PRs, but reviewer's evaluation on a case-by-case basis of their lack of copyrightability, i.e. On 2026-06-18 at 17:56+00:00, Greg Hogan wrote: > evidently not creative, similar to those that guix import > and similar tools might produce Mentions of legally significant changes should be completely dropped from the GCD, as we cannot apply them to LLM outputs (for now, since we cannot trace them back to the original authors). Kind regards, Phong
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
