Перейти к содержимому
Оригинал
Armin Ronacher·· 24.07.2026Оценка ИИ52

Codeberg 因生成式 AI 条款分裂开源社区

Оригинальный заголовок: Codeberg Divides

Заголовок и краткое изложение на выбранном языке ожидают перевода.

Краткий обзор ИИ

Armin Ronacher 就 Codeberg 修改条款、排除主要由生成式 AI 编写的项目一事发表看法。他认为该规则模糊、难以执行,因为无法给近期项目标注 AI 代码占比,并推测中间派会离开;他更希望 Codeberg 要么明确禁止 LLM 参与,要么只针对垃圾内容和滥用资源单独立规。

Полный текст

Полный текст на выбранном языке ожидает перевода. Пока показан оригинал.

written on July 24, 2026

Codeberg recently changed its terms to exclude projects that are largely written with generative AI. Considering I want GitHub to get some competition I have thoughts about this.

GitHub’s governance has never been democratic and there is plenty about the platform that I dislike. Yet I do not need my infrastructure to be democratic but I need it to be predictable and reasonably neutral towards the Open Source software hosted on it. A democratic provider without a clear constitution can be worse at those things than a corporation is.

Codeberg is entirely within its rights to do run the platform like they want. It is a German association with members and a democratic process, and that process produced a result. But a democratic vote says nothing about whether the decision is a good one, particularly for the people already depending on the platform. A majority can still decide that certain projects and people no longer belong.

The new terms prohibit projects that mostly consist of code written by generative AI tools. That’s fine, but these days I could not assign authorship percentages to my recent projects. For me this rule is quite vague and I would bet that it makes it hard to enforce. In practice my assumptoin is that the center will leave.

If anything a harsher line would probably be preferable. If Codeberg wants no LLM involvement, it should say so. On the other hand if the objection is just spam and abusive resource consumption, it should write rules for those instead. Now it defers the details of the policy to moderators and the communit which already draws a much harder boundary than the text does, judging by the tone of the discussion around it.

It is a shame that the Open Source and Free Software communities are splitting this deeply over LLMs and agents. These systems have problems, but these tools are also becoming part of how software is made. The Open Source world needs to figure out how to engage with that future. More importantly, LLMs if used well, should be welcome to the Open Source community as they can be used to reclaim control and take power away from large corporations.

I want GitHub to face true competition in the Open Source space. I would particularly like some of it to come from associations rather than another large entity. As a European project, Codeberg naturally matters to me even more. I just wish Codeberg were more forward-looking here and be willing to host the Open Source software of tomorrow and not only software approved by the community today.

Источник: Armin Ronacher · lucumr.pocoo.org