A couple small clarifications

Posted Oct 22, 2025 3:10 UTC (Wed) by bronson (subscriber, #4806)
In reply to: A couple small clarifications by newren
Parent article: Git considers SHA-256, Rust, LLMs, and more

If the LLM merely fixed up your writing, then you should be in the clear? Junio's proposed guidelines allow for AI tool use, as long as the output is considered tainted:

This policy does not apply to other uses of AI, such as researching APIs or algorithms, static analysis, or debugging, provided their output is not to be included in contributions.

(That makes sense because useful LLMs are pretty much all trained on incompatible data. The entire industry has rampant piracy at its foundation.)

If you wrote understood everything, and the LLM made some occasional minor fixes, then there's little chance of it being able to generate infringing content. IIUC.

to post comments

A couple small clarifications

Posted Oct 22, 2025 15:47 UTC (Wed) by newren (guest, #5160) [Link]

> If the LLM merely fixed up your writing, then you should be in the clear? Junio's proposed guidelines allow for AI tool use, as long as the output is considered tainted:

> This policy does not apply to other uses of AI, such as researching APIs or algorithms, static analysis, or debugging, provided their output is not to be included in contributions.

To me, the wording of that exception does not include my case because I didn't just have it notify me of problematic text that I then went and manually fixed up myself, I had it suggest corrected text and then I looked at the diffs and picked the pieces that I liked and split it up into different commits (and possibly modified further). So the whole "provided their output is not to be included in contributions" rules that out.

Also, note that I was feeding all the git manpages to the LLM, one at a time, so it is not just my documentation I was having it edit. Those manpages are the combined work of many people over a long time. It is true that the LLM only suggested minor occasional fixes to the manpages, and I don't think that would be enough to trigger any problems, but to me the latest proposal is extra strict and conservative and rules out usecases like, which I think would be regrettable.