Proposed KDE LLM guidelines (#187) · Issues · Plasma / Plasma Workspace · GitLab
invent.kde.org
This is a continuation of this mailing list thread about "fully LLM-generated merge requests, preserved at https://mail.kde.org/pipermail/kde-devel/2026-September/004496.html There, I proposed...

Direct link to the LLM Policy Discussion: https://invent.kde.org/plasma/plasma-workspace/-/work_items/187

Example of a KDE dev not wanting environmental concerns to play any role, despite KDE having an environmental project:

Devs rejecting any notion of transparency by disclosing AI usage in code submissions (in direct opposition to advice from the FSFE):

And all of this is coming right after the debacle with an AI slop project being allowed to give a presentation at Akademy, and the person asking how this was allowed being blocked by KDE:

https://lemmy.nz/post/42029517

as well as the discussion thread bringing up legitimate concerns about AI usage being closed:

https://discuss.kde.org/t/sorry-to-bring-up-a-contentious-topic-kde-ai-llm-policy/46333/164

As someone who genuinely loves KDE, and has even donated to the project multiple times, I sadly have to accept that the majority of KDE have hopped onto the Pro-AI train, and they will not be dissuaded otherwise.

  • nocteb@feddit.org
    208·
    21 hours ago

    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.

    • Crozekiel@lemmy.zipEnglish
      62·
      19 hours ago

      In the end the developer (or AI wielding human) is responsible for the code quality and its license which is what matters.

      They literally may not have any control over the license, that is one of the many big problems people have. Please read the article linked by OP about the copyrightabilty of LLM generated code - https://fsfe.org/news/2026/news-20260825-01.html. It depends heavily on how they used the LLM, so if there is zero disclosure required the entire project could get into licensing hell down the road.

      • nocteb@feddit.org
        1·
        9 hours ago

        Yes obviously the code you commit must be yours and you need to make sure it is. That is already a rule, what’s the point of telling people how to work above that?

        • JK_Flip_Flop@lemmy.world
          3·
          5 hours ago

          Due to the nature of LLMs being trained on existing code there is a chance that generated code is lifted verbatim from another piece of software whose license doesn’t permit the copy without attribution. Its a potential legal minefield that I think FOSS project should just steer clear of until the legal landscape surrounding generative AI cools off some.