Re: AI/LLM tool policy: failure
Javier Jimenez Shaw via gdal-dev <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | gmane.comp.gis.gdal.devel |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <CADRrdKtYZj0GPoBdNQx3PTq4q7vXhRwGxH1UFC+2RgOC6nCJ+g@mail.gmail.com> |
Thanks Even. I found the previous AI policy too naïve. I am totally fine with a much more strict policy. As you and other people explained, the situation PR-producer vs reviewer is completely unbalanced with AI. Cheers Javier On Sun, 12 Apr 2026 at 21:49, Even Rouault via gdal-dev < [email protected]> wrote: > Hi, > > It was nice trying but I believe we can close the experiment as a > failure. At least I personally cannot deal with the mental consequences > in term of reviewing. To make it short, I believe humans aren't designed > to be at the receiving end of LLM generated content. This is a too > unnatural relationship. More details in this thread: > https://lists.osgeo.org/pipermail/qgis-developer/2026-April/068204.html > > So what to do now... ? Personally I believe I'll give up on reviewing > LLM generated PRs. If there are other devs with merge rights who want to > give them a try, please raise your arm. Otherwise, if there are not, > we'll have to revise the policy to better reflect our wishes and abilities. > > Even > > -- > http://www.spatialys.com > My software is free, but my time generally not. > > _______________________________________________ > gdal-dev mailing list > [email protected] > https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/gdal-dev > _______________________________________________ gdal-dev mailing list [email protected] https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/gdal-dev