The GNOME.org Extensions hosting for GNOME Shell extensions will no longer accept new contributions with AI-generated code. A new rule has been added to their review guidelines to forbid AI-generated code.
Due to the growing number of GNOME Shell extensions looking to appear on extensions.gnome.org that were generated using AI, it’s now prohibited. The new rule in their guidelines note that AI-generated code will be explicitly rejected
deleted by creator
GNOME manually reviews every extension, and they understandably don’t want to review AI generated code.
deleted by creator
Jeez. Calm down.
deleted by creator
Then do whatever you need to do to stop freaking out about other peoples’ right to choose to not deal with LLMs.
deleted by creator
deleted by creator
Yes they actually review the extensions, you’ll find more information on the blogpost from last week.
deleted by creator
@uncouple9831 @imecth Because they care. Quaint old concept, I know…
deleted by creator
@uncouple9831 That’s how my Mastodon client works. You asked, “Why would they be reviewing code?” I gave you the answer.
deleted by creator
@uncouple9831 If you really care about quality, it does.
deleted by creator
in the case of ai generated code, that is almost always the case. People say “but I review all my pet neural network’s code!” but they don’t. If they did, the job would actuallydtake longer. Reading and understanding code takes longer than writing it.
deleted by creator
“why would that be anyone but the original author?”
That is what i was replying to, and I replied to the intended comment
deleted by creator
no, the opposite. The problem with ai pull requests is that in most cases whoever submits them does not understand the code and expects someone else to review it for them (that’s if they are even aware of the concept of code reviews in the first place).
deleted by creator
Yes it would be someone else. If the code looks good then it might last a long time, and it could even be expanded upon. One key point of FOSS is that anyone can change it, and if it’s good, people will.
deleted by creator
@uncouple9831
That would be any person trying to audit that barely functioning pile of poorly structured code someone left behind after finishing their contract or being fired, for example.
deleted by creator