A thought on considering AI policies for FOSS projects: who will you attract , and who will you repel with the policy? If you reverse the polarity later, will the “damage” on either side be repairable if the policy turned out to be bad? e.g. if you say “no LLMs for now, maybe never” what’s the downside, and the upside? And vice versa: what’s the one-year, two-year risk of accepting LLM content? ISTM that a no-LLM policy, for code, content, communications, is lower risk than a pro- or tolerant policy. But maybe I’m missing something. From a purely pragmatic POV, I there are still risks from accepting LLM code just based on maintainability, sustainability, and institutional knowledge. My theory is that LLM using contributors are going to show less attachment to a project, because the way that LLMs (seemingly) reduce friction to creating PRs. From an adoption standpoint, I wonder: which and how many users will be put off if a project goes LLM, versus the other way? I’m sure there are some people who’ll drop a project if it declares a no-LLM policy, but ISTM fewer people in that camp and … well, it’s a value judgement which camp you’d rather nurture.