glibc AI policy

[Florian Weimer]

* Carlos O'Donell:

> On 4/14/26 2:09 PM, Florian Weimer wrote:
>> * Carlos O'Donell:
>> 
>>> On 4/13/26 8:52 AM, Florian Weimer wrote:
>>>> For the record, I'm not happy with requiring Assisted-by:.  If those
>>>> companies want us to advertise their products, that's something they
>>>> should pay for.  It also raises the question whether we need to track if
>>>> users paid models or the free version, which may have different
>>>> ownership terms of generated materials.  Without such information, it
>>>> would be misleading to use the trailers for any project-specific purpose
>>>> (which is why I think it's mostly about advertising).
>>>
>>> Sorry, when I reviewed your earlier patch I tried to express that I did
>>> not think that we needed to write the name of the actual tool used, but
>>> I failed to express that clearly. When I said "LLM" I meant it literally
>>> in that we could use "Assisted-by: LLM" and that would be sufficient
>>> for now.
>>
>> I can live with that.  Regarding outcomes, I would like to see a
>> third one: We should not fall into the trap a dehumanize
>> contributions because we could be wrong.
>
> May you please expand on this a bit more?

I don't reviewers to actively look for LLM usage in non-labeled
contributions because it's bad to accuse someone of being an LLM when
they are not.

So we can say “tool-generated contributions must be labeled as such”,
but we can't really speculate publicly whether a particular contribution
was written by hand or not.

Thanks,
Florian