AI-assisted contributions

[IzzySoft]

An issue was opened with us at IzzyOnDroid, requesting removal of all Fossify apps due to this change.

We will reject it for now, as our AI policy (basically, we do not accept apps which are fully or partly LLM coded) is not (yet) applied retro-actively to apps that were listed with us before it was established. Still, it raises a valid point if your apps now switch to accept LLM generated code. Unfortunately, that text does not link to the guidelines, and a quick look did not reveal where they are.

Can you please shortly outline the related rules (and maybe link to the guidelines, also from that Readme)?

[naveensingh]

Hi, the general code contribution rules are here: https://github.com/FossifyOrg/General-Discussion#contributing-code

Can you please shortly outline the related rules (and maybe link to the guidelines, also from that Readme)?

Basically, the new rule is simple: the authorship itself won't be used to decide whether to reject or accept contributions of any kind. If the code looks good, works well, meets the required quality standards, and the author follows the contribution rules, it gets merged into Fossify.

AI contributions were explicitly not allowed in the past (e.g., FossifyOrg/Voice-Recorder#298 (review)), and I'm aware that accepting them may be a problem due to the nature of things, but personally, I'd rather focus on development and maintenance than classifying contributions into human or AI.

This may change depending on how the situation evolves in the future, but for now, I hope the above clears it up.

[IzzySoft]

Thanks Naveen! That sounds reasonable concerning code quality. As most LLMs were trained on copyrighted material, but usually strip origin, credits, and licenses, I hope you won't get any copyright issues there, though (and not too much headache reviewing – though I guess PRs looking like headache, would also conflict with your code contribution rules, and thus get rejected early).

Agreed, we have to see how things develop. Apps which were already listed with us when our AI policy was established (so e.g. all Fossify apps except for Documents), fall under the "grandfathering rule" for now anyway; we may revisit them later, though. But as you wrote: we'll have to see "how the situation evolves in the future". At least we have not to fear for "slop" from your side – though the other points mentioned in our policy, have their weight as well…

[tswistak]

@naveensingh Out of curiosity, how much AI assistance have you used while creating the Documents app? As mentioned in the linked discussion from Codeberg, that's the question that's missing in this conversation, seeing that you're keen on using AI agents performing app tests on mobile devices.

[naveensingh]

I honestly cannot put a number on that because as you probably know, the app has been under development for a while now (did the initial local draft soon after this commit) and I have used AI/ML tools in one form or another in the past, so it depends on how you define assistance as that can range from using AI as a research tool to "vibe coding" something end to end on a weekend. If the question is whether the Fossify Documents app contains any code generated by AI at all, then the answer is yes, and under the linked policy, I agree that it should be removed from IzzyOnDroid.

[tswistak]

Thanks for your honest answer. I have similar feelings to you about AI usage (maybe even more strict, because I've set a trap on vibecoders in my app), but I think we should respect if IzzyOnDroid maintainers don't want any AI-assisted development.

(Don't get me wrong. I don't have any hard feelings toward Izzy and nothing against Fossify. I just wanted some clarifications if the AI policy is equally applied.)

[naveensingh]

Basically, the new rule is simple: the authorship itself won't be used to decide whether to reject or accept contributions of any kind. If the code looks good, works well, meets the required quality standards, and the author follows the contribution rules, it gets merged into Fossify.

I see I clarified what will be accepted, but there seems to be some confusion/curiosity regarding how much AI I am personally willing to use in Fossify or how much Fossify will depend on these AI tools/systems in the future, so I want to be upfront that the current plan is to use AI wherever it can accelerate development and maintenance with a net positive effect without worsening quality or turning Fossify into, I don't want to say... slop. I totally understand if this disqualifies Fossify apps from being listed on IzzyOnDroid.

In my opinion, this whole AI thing we have now is a complex situation (morally and otherwise), and it will disrupt a huge amount of things, including the way open-source is done, but we all have to draw the line somewhere to manage it. In Fossify, I'm drawing it at code quality, UI/UX, user privacy, functionality, and getting high-quality open-source apps in the hands of the users. In general, assuming it works properly, I favor automation, whether it's deterministic CI or chips crunching numbers to write code or drive a car.

Lastly, the mentioned agent was custom-built for my personal home automation stuff, but now it's also allowed to raise PRs, link duplicate issues, etc. It wasn't specifically created for Fossify, and it does not have any write permissions in Fossify.

I hope all this clears up the project direction in the context of artificial intelligence.