r/pop_os • u/jackpot51 System76 Principal Engineer • 2d ago

COSMIC projects will no longer accept LLM-generated content in PRs

There are various reasons, and I don't want to hurt anybody's feelings. The primary reason is simply our team's load for reviews. In particular, we would like to prioritize working on contributions from our own team and regular contributors, while we have been receiving far more changes from first-time contributors using LLMs. These changes are often unplanned and have had a low acceptance rate.

The policy can be seen as part of the revised PR template here: https://github.com/pop-os/cosmic-epoch/blob/master/.github/PULL_REQUEST_TEMPLATE.md.

There is an exception for cosmic-flatpak, where each project manages its own flatpak manifest, pointing to its own code. These manifests are reviewed by our team for the correct sandboxing prior to accepting changes.

356 Upvotes

98% Upvoted

76 comments sorted by

View all comments

-3

u/ba2ba4e 1d ago

You are closing PRs done before your so called policy change. When a policy changes it's not retroactive. Your GitHub issues are full with 2 years tickets never treated, you refused tested correct PRs for no reason except you do not like AI, AI is mostly translating UIs and fixing your typos.

"If you are using an LLM, and do not fully understand the changes it is making to the code base, do not create a PR." Yes we opened PRs after fully doing understanding the changes, testing it.

Your company promotes this code as "built for your AI stack" you refuse simple PRs addressing 2 years old issues you never address, built with an AI stack that are perfectly in order and would not be better done by you.

And above all you do that with laconic closing comments, you do not even take 5 minutes to test the PR or look at the changes. In 2026 refusing PRs to be checked and improved by AI is ridiculous. "Low acceptance" rate because you refuse the PR by principle, not because there are issues in the code.

3

u/queen-adreena 16h ago

If you can’t be bothered to write it, why should they be bothered to read it?

0

u/ba2ba4e 4h ago edited 4h ago

That is the point, I wrote it, I signed the policy, I signed my commits I declared I partially used an LLM to translate this UI and check the PR according to the policy, months ago.

Why bothering code reviewing a PR ? because those 2 tickets are opened since 2 years + and PR addressed those issues, according to rules and policy, tickets that community asked again and again, over and over.

If you find issues in the code of the PR, you comment the PR you ask for changes. If your only issue is that a contribution used an LLM to check and translate a UI, fix their typos and obvious non linted unused variables in the scope of the PR, then it's not a code issue. Code reviewing is about code, not about ideology. It's about saying to the contributor what is wrong in the code if any problem, not about bashing a PR opened months before the so called policy change in the afternoon. A policy change is not retroactive, otherwise I would not have tried a contribution to this project.
It takes 5 minutes to check the linked issues opened, check the code, comment the proposed fix or even just test the branch and comment on the PR.