Add an explicit AI policy to our documentation
envgap__pypa__pip-13827
01 / FAILURE SIGNATURE
As reported upstream
No identifying execution failure has been captured.
Not a benchmark task.
- The project already builds and runs before the fix, so there is nothing to repair.
02 / ENVIRONMENT RECIPE
- Base commit
fa81791e4add3395e0dffc3e253a2c7da1efe68d- Manifest
pyproject.toml- Reproduce
Awaiting issue-specific recipe- Run under trace
Awaiting a meaningful runtime command
03 / ORIGINAL ISSUE TEXT
pypa/pip #13827 · read the original issue
As noted in #13825, we're starting to get AI-generated contributions. In order to ensure our limited maintainer bandwidth isn't overwhelmed, and to protect us from any ownership or licensing concerns over submitted code, I suggest that we explicitly adopt and document an AI policy. My strong preference is for something based on the `attrs` policy - https://github.com/python-attrs/attrs/blob/main/.github/AI_POLICY.md. In my view, this takes the correct stance, focusing on ensuring that every PR has a human contributor associated, and that contributor takes full resaponsibility for the technical and legal/ownership aspects of their contribution. There are always going to be judgement calls involved - after all, LLMs *by design* produce plausible looking content - so the policy will of necessity be subject to interpretation. By choosing a policy that assumes good faith on the part of submitters, while still being clear that we *will* impose penalties like rejection or banning when necessary, I think we strike a reasonable balance. I have created #13826 as a starting point for discussion.
04 / LABELS
Labels from the report text only; not yet run
No supported category has been assigned.
Label rules and the text that matched
[]