diff options
| -rw-r--r-- | binutils/MAINTAINERS | 62 |
1 files changed, 62 insertions, 0 deletions
diff --git a/binutils/MAINTAINERS b/binutils/MAINTAINERS index 59f1603..fff5543 100644 --- a/binutils/MAINTAINERS +++ b/binutils/MAINTAINERS @@ -233,6 +233,68 @@ The details of the Developer's Certificate or Origin can be found here: https://developercertificate.org/ + --------- LLM Generated Patches --------- + +The GNU Binutils project is currently *NOT* accepting LLM generated patches. + +This is because the copyright status of code generated by a LLM (Large +Language Model [1]) is currently unclear. The policy applies to all +parts of the GNU Binutils including, but not limited to, source code, +documentation and the testsuites. + +There are however some exceptions to the policy: + + * Using LLMs to assist in writing code is fine providing that the + LLM does not actually generate code. So for example using an + LLM to provide text to speech services or to search for published + information is OK. + + * LLM generated code that is not "legally significant"[2] is OK. + As a rule of thumb, this means that trivial changes, such as + spelling corrections, or small code formatting cleanups are fine. + +Using an LLM to inspire or help create a patch might be OK. It is a +question of whether LLM generated output eventually makes it into the +patch. If it does, then the patch is unacceptable. (Unless it can +be considered legally insignificant). + +When submitting a non-legally-significant LLM generated change, it is +still necessary to clearly indicate the use of the LLM. The +identification should take the form of a line starting with the +"Generated-By: " prefix which identifies the LLM used. For example: + + Generated-By: GNU-LLM version 1.0 + +In addition all patch submissions must involve a human. Fully +automated patch submission, whether by a bot, a script, or some other +means is not acceptable. This is because only humans can sign a +Developer Certificate of Origin or complete a FSF Copyright Assignment +and one of these needs to be in place for every submission. + +The copyright assignment or DCO allows the GNU Binutils project to +trust that the submitter is legally able to make the contribution +and that the submission can be used under the terms of the GNU General +Public License (see the COPYING3 file). + +Footnotes: + +This policy is not set in stone. It may well be reviewed and changed +in the future. + +The policy uses the term "LLM generated" rather than "A.I. generated" +as the latter could be misunderstood. See [3] for more details. +Nevertheless the policy applies to any kind of machine generated +contribution where the copyright status is unclear. + +The reason for requiring trivial LLM generated patches to be labelled +is to set a precedent. In the future, if non-trivial patches become +acceptable, the standard of labelling LLM submissions should already +be in place. + +[1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Large_language_model +[2]: https://www.gnu.org/prep/maintain/maintain.html#Legally-Significant +[3]: https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/words-to-avoid.en.html#ArtificialIntelligence + --------- Branch Checkins --------- If a patch is approved for check in to the mainline sources, it can |