glibc AI policy

[Carlos O'Donell]

On 4/7/26 2:16 PM, Sam James wrote:
> Florian Weimer <fw@deneb.enyo.de> writes:
> 
>> * Jeffrey Law:
>>
>>> On 4/2/2026 12:56 PM, Collin Funk wrote:
>>>> DJ Delorie <dj@redhat.com> writes:
>>>>
>>>>> 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 copyright situation is the reason I am against tentatively accepting
>>>> patches while waiting for a more official policy from the FSF. Thanks
>>>> for mentioning that.'
>>
>>> Yea, that's where I'd land as well.  Until the copyright situation is
>>> better understood I would not accept any LLM generated code that is
>>> outside the de-minimis guidelines set by the FSF.
>>
>> Has the FSF communicated this (not accepting LLM-generated
>> contributions for now) to the glibc stewards?  Why would the
>> de-minimis guidelines apply, anyway?  I assume those are about not
>> diluting the copyright assignment, but that's hardly a concern for GNU
>> components accepting contributions under the DCO.
> 
> Outside of communication to glibc stewards which I would not be party
> to, with regard to Emacs, there was
> https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/emacs-devel/2026-03/msg00554.html.

As a GNU project maintainer for glibc I have not received GNU Project
or FSF guidance for or against LLM generated content.

There have been some internal discussions around the topic and there
we are likewise waiting since RMS has said the GNU Project will look
into creating a position and provide us with an update.

This has me leaning towards clarifying that we would accept LLM
output so long as it is legally insignificant; since we have always
accepted such things from contributors.

We should at least identify such cases with correct attribution for
the tooling. Particularly if someone submits a test case that has
been reduced we can ask about the license and copyright of the
original files.

Likewise we should clarify the position for assistive technologies.

-- 
Cheers,
Carlos.