glibc AI policy

[DJ Delorie]

Florian Weimer <fweimer@redhat.com> writes:
> I would be fine with waiting for guidance from the FSF.

I would be fine *saying* we're waiting.  That's different than not
posting a policy until then.

"We're not accepting AI patches until the FSF says we can" is an
acceptable policy.

>> Waiting until after the flood of AI patches comes in is too late.
>
> Why?  In some ways, the worst-case scenario for us as the community
> would be a flood of high-quality contributions (whether AI-generated or
> not).  How would we block that, and could we justify it?

I didn't say we should block it, I said we should anticipate it.  If
that wave of high-quality AI patches happens, we need to be prepared.

Given that GNU is a USA-based project, and that the copyright status of
AI in the USA is still... "nebulous at best"... it might take time to
figure out whether or not we can accept that first AI patch that comes
along.  Better to take that time now so we can respond more quickly
then.

> The low-quality flood largely hasn't happened, and I doubt that it
> ever will at this point.  Not being on Github probably has helped a
> lot.

That just means we have more time, but doesn't mean we should wait for
it.