AwesomeWM's Stance on LLM/AI Code Contributions?

[Commander-Zal]

Hi there,

There is a growing concern in the FLOSS community around accepting code contributions that were directly generated from an LLM/AI. As they are trained on code that is not license compatible with GPL, it is quite possible for them to recreate that incompatible code verbatim. If that code was accepted in a pull request to a GPL licensed project, it would unknowingly to both the submitter and the project itself introduce plagiarized, copyrighted code into the codebase, potentially opening itself up to legal liability.

This talk from FOSS Backstage Berlin does an excellent job of showing how LLM/AI Generated code can directly copy infringing code in its output: https://youtu.be/xvuiSgXfqc4?t=247

In Europe, a court ruled that LLM/AI output is able to be found as plagiarizing: https://www.twobirds.com/en/insights/2025/landmark-ruling-of-the-munich-regional-court-(gema-v-openai)-on-copyright-and-ai-training

According to an article on the subject, about 10% of LLM code output is likely to be plagiarized, copyrighted code: https://www.theatlantic.com/technology/2026/01/ai-memorization-research/685552/

In response to this threat, many FLOSS projects have decided to officially stop knowingly accepting AI generated code submissions, to reduce the risk of legal action in the first place, as well as to lessen their liability and give them a stronger defense if brought to court from an undisclosed AI contribution. The latest to do so is the GCC project, and previously the SDL library did the same.

What is AwesomeWM's official stance on AI generated code contributions submissions? (and I want to emphasize generated code contributions, as I think an LLM pointing out bugs, or asking it about things in general do not render the same sort of legal threat to FLOSS projects).

Thank you for your time and consideration!

[actionless]

#3338 (comment)

the only remotely valid point frmo your wall of text is potential plagiarism - but it's problem for BOTH human- or ai-generated code, so that's a totally orthogonal question of plagiarism-checking thing disregard of biological-ness of its origin

also a bit funny that such a bikeshed issue is being brought by a person who not contributor to AwesomeWM itself - which returns us back to the point which i expressed in my original comment, that such narratives are just stupid political goyness

UPD: also seems like you're just generic biological-supremacy extremist who do mass-spamming (ex. linuxmint/cinnamon#13914 qtile/qtile#6011 pop-os/cosmic-epoch#3774) so closing the topic as spam

[actionless]

i don't have any 'bias' just pointing out 1) clear spamming 2) hate based on non-biological origin 3) lack of logic - as problem of plagiarism is orthogonal to non-/biological origin of code 4) trying to affect development/management decisions of project without contributing to them prior 5) purposeful misinformation - as 'reference' links have different info than presented (for example GCC adopting disclosure policies not 'banning ai' etc)

all of those (especially combined) are a clear signature of political activism