Conversation
NeffIsBack
requested review from
Marshall-Hallenbeck,
mpgn and
zblurx
as code owners
| Please include a summary of the change and which issue is fixed, or what the enhancement does. | ||
| List any dependencies that are required for this change. | ||
|
|
||
| If you have used AI in any form, please state the tool you used (e.g. Claude Code, Cursor, Amp) along with the extent that the work was AI-assisted. See the project's AI policy for more details: https://github.com/Pennyw0rth/NetExec/blob/main/AI_POLICY.md |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Should we say tools & models used?
| The NetExec project has strict rules for AI usage: | ||
|
|
||
| - **All AI usage in any form must be disclosed.** You must state | ||
| the tool you used (e.g. Claude Code, Cursor, Amp) along with |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Same here, tools and models?
| @@ -0,0 +1,69 @@ | |||
| # AI Usage Policy | |||
|
|
|||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Can we include a link to Ghostty's policy as a source since we've copied theirs as a base.
| Text and code are the only acceptable AI-generated content, per the | ||
| other rules in this policy. | ||
|
|
||
| - **Bad AI drivers will be banned and ridiculed in public.** You've |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I think we should provide a single warning and then ban. We can always change this in the future, but I'm a fan of being a bit more lenient right now. Ghostty has gotten a lot more slop than us, so I understand why they are being more strict, but I don't think we need that right now.
| the people get better, the AI gets better, or both, we have to have | ||
| strict rules to protect maintainers. | ||
|
|
||
| ## AI is Welcome Here |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I'm not sure I'm as pro-AI as the Ghostty group. Not sure about other maintainers but I'd prefer to word this a little less supportive and more cautious. AI is definitely useful and I use it in a lot of places, but it fails miserably at advanced stuff and can be very unreliable.
|
|
||
| **Our reason for the strict AI policy is not due to an anti-AI stance**, but | ||
| instead due to the number of highly unqualified people using AI. It's the | ||
| people, not the tools, that are the problem. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I think a lot of the tools are the problem as well.
Marshall-Hallenbeck
left a comment
Marshall-Hallenbeck
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Submitted my general ideas and feedback. Overall I think we should be more lenient to people (give them one warning and refer to our policy), and also update some wording because I just don't trust AI tooling for a lot of things, especially niche areas like what we do with NetExec.
2 participants
Description
Unfortunately, due to the increase of low effort AI contributions, we are at a point where we have to implement an AI policy.
@mitchellh pretty much perfectly phrased it in this Pull Request: ghostty-org/ghostty#10412
As a solution we adapt this policy as well with this PR.