RFC: Policy on bot/vibe-coded/stochastic/tainted/non-human contributions

首先阅读 RFC 正文以及其中引用的现有 contributing.md 政策，然后查看包含 54 条评论的讨论，了解当前存在分歧的要点。当社区达成决定，并且已达成一致的 AI 政策已记录下来以便应用于所有 gbdev 项目时，即视为完成。

Edit by @avivace

This is an open RFC on adopting an AI policy across gbdev projects. We'd like to hear from the community.

This covers all types of interactions (code, docs, issues, reviews, discussions) and all levels of AI involvement - from fully bot-generated contributions, to AI-assisted work, to using LLMs/copilots as a drafting or editing aid. If you have thoughts on where the line should be drawn (or whether there should be one), please share them.

Original body follows:

// I'm putting this in this repo because it's the de facto gbdev "policy" repo -- in essence: because contributing.md applies to all gbdev repos/projects.
// I want to spend zero time having to think about this, let alone hours burning out trying to (re)write words that people (mis)understand. I'm willing to argue about it if anything reasonable comes up, but I'm not (going to survive) writing an essay upfront.

Why have a policy?
It sends a message about the type of community this is. Sending a clear message enables people to judge if this is a safe place that welcomes them or not. Bots will, of course, be unaffected.

My idea of an acceptable policy would cover the following points:

• No use of LLMs/chatbots/"AI" to contribute to (interact with) the community is acceptable.
• Communities are humans.
• This is a community.

I'm willing to negotiate on this, but not really.

gbdev/gb-asm-tutorial#187, gbdev/gb-asm-tutorial#188
Have a look at how productive these guys are on their hundreds of forks they just started contributing to in seconds. Amazing!