Skip to content

Follow the same LLM policy as rust-lang/rust - #7081

Merged
ytmimi merged 2 commits into
rust-lang:mainfrom
ytmimi:llm_policy
Aug 31, 2026
Merged

Follow the same LLM policy as rust-lang/rust#7081
ytmimi merged 2 commits into
rust-lang:mainfrom
ytmimi:llm_policy

Conversation

@ytmimi

@ytmimi ytmimi commented Aug 28, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Linking to the same policy established by rust-lang/rust.

I want to make sure the majority of us agree with applying the policy: @rust-lang/rustfmt @rust-lang/rustfmt-contributors.

Link to the same policy followed by rust-lang/rust.
@rustbot rustbot added the S-waiting-on-review Status: awaiting review from the assignee but also interested parties. label Aug 28, 2026
This also follows what rust-lang/rust is doing.
@camsteffen

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

This is great!

Well, since I was asked, 😄 I just want to share one minor point of feedback on the policy itself. Let me know if I should share this elsewhere.

I think the following section can plausibly be understood to carve out an allowance for fully autonomous LLM posting of experimental PRs. That is probably not the intent(?), but I think it is not a stretch to anticipate that sort of usage in today's climate.

✅ Allowed
...
Using an LLM in the creation of clearly experimental code changes that are not meant to be reviewed but must live as PRs on rust-lang/rust for tooling reasons, such as to run crater or perf.

I would reword this to make it specifically about code generation and possibly add a subpoint that using an LLM to autonomously post a PR is prohibited.

I would also caveat here that the person posting should have a personal understanding of why the particular experiment may be of value before posting even though the code may not be thoroughly reviewed.

@jieyouxu

jieyouxu commented Aug 28, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

I just want to share one minor point of feedback on the policy itself. Let me know if I should share this elsewhere.

I think that should probably adjust the wording on the actual Forge policy. Maybe worth discussing in #project-llm-policy?

@ytmimi

ytmimi commented Aug 31, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

The majority of us are in agreement here so I'm going to go ahead and merge this. Thank you all for taking a look and voting 😁

@ytmimi
ytmimi added this pull request to the merge queue Aug 31, 2026
Merged via the queue into rust-lang:main with commit 5c8d474 Aug 31, 2026
27 checks passed
@rustbot rustbot added release-notes Needs an associated changelog entry and removed S-waiting-on-review Status: awaiting review from the assignee but also interested parties. labels Aug 31, 2026
@camsteffen

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

I think that should probably adjust the wording on the actual Forge policy. Maybe worth discussing in #project-llm-policy?

Re-posted there, thanks.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

release-notes Needs an associated changelog entry

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants