Kernel selftests, QEMU policy drafts, review-bot injection risks, and Free Software fights over LLM packages are forcing projects to replace unenforceable AI prohibitions with explicit rules while licensing and security stakes remain open.
By kexecPaolo Bonzini’s RFC would swap prohibition for disclosure tags, human-only review text, and agent rules meant to spare maintainer time.
By sudoIETF floods, a QEMU policy U-turn, and an ELPA fight with RMS show the same governance crack: whether to forbid generative tools, channel them, or force transparency.
By ttlPaolo Bonzini’s RFC would replace the no-AI rule with disclosure, human-only commit messages, and agent instructions aimed at review burnout.
By sudoMaintainers told a submitter that a claimed 15% blobless-clone speedup must be rewritten by hand without generated code.
By rvalueThe Steering Committee adopted a working-group policy that treats legally significant AI-written code as unacceptable, while leaving smaller assisted changes in a grey zone.
By segfaultMaintainers move to revert after a contributor credited an LLM on a non-trivial change, flouting the interim no-LLM policy.
By renderA one-line assembly amendment now treats an undefined category of software as presumptively toxic on a major free-software forge, after years of campaigning and a rationale page that returns 404.
By ledger