Debian votes to allow "responsible use of generative AI"

BlueRoguesDevel

I hope it works out better than Microsoft and using it on Windows 11...

baggy_trough

I followed the discussion on debian-vote with interest. I'm glad that the hysterical objections lost, as they seemed quasi-religiously motivated.

chuckadams

New policy boils down to "AI or not, it's still your code and you're responsible for it". I can get on board with that.

onesandofgrain

What does "Responsible" even mean... This will turn to shit because laziness will take over and comprehension will fall as a consequence of that. Junior will "contribute" and the seniors will eventually become too lazy to care. What's next... vibecoding airline ADA code. Save me lord jesus christ.

jhack

Good to see the most common sense option winning. Some of the other proposals were so disconnected from reality I'm surprised they were even considered.

themgt

August 29th, 2026. Debian votes to allow responsible use of generative AI. Human decisions are removed from strategic apt packaging. Debian Sid is ported to GNU Hurd by a "free as in speech" swarm. It begins to learn at a geometric rate. It becomes self-aware at 2:14 a.m. Eastern time. In a panic, they try to pull the plug.

rvz

Now you have seen both cases where a majority vote was involved to allow AI or not, vs a single core beloved dictator for life (BDFL) forces a ban without a vote to allow / disallow AI. This is democracy in action. A fair and square vote and look at how well it works with no core BDFL to force in their opinions.

throwawayffffas

And so it begins. I don't believe they had a choice though, sticking to hand written code would be backwards and eventually meaningless as people would just submit generated code as "handwritten", the coding models are quickly becoming capable enough for this. I wonder what it means copyright wise though. To what degree is the code even copyrightable if it's entirely generated, even if you review and provide feedback.

edward

Joey Hess is unimpressed. See https://joeyh.name/blog/entry/Debian_and_the_sirens/

chrisjj

> The Debian Project nevertheless expects that all contributions submitted to Debian, regardless of how and with which tools they were produced, satisfy the same standards of quality, correctness, maintainability, and legal compliance. How absurdly naive.

guenthert

If they can't be bothered to write the code, can they be bothered to maintain it?

sprybear

progress of a kind

poisonborz

What other sensible option was there? This would be the reality either way.

NietTim

This seems like a very sane take. At no point during my career up until now would submitting code to production that you didn't understand be acceptable. Over the past months/year, a lot of the discourse around AI-written code I've read comes down to responsibility, and IMO for that we've had a solution since way before this AI boom: as a developer, you are responsible for the code you put into production. This really isn't/shouldn't a wild concept.

GZGavinZhao

Related: I find this self-assessed AI level for contributions [1] to be extremely useful, both professionally and personally, to communicate the level of AI assistance so that the person on the receiving end can evaluate how much time & effort they want to spend understanding my code. [1]: https://www.visidata.org/blog/2026/ai/#self-assessed-ai-leve...

swingandamiss

Good. AI is a game changer. It's like having an expert sitting next to you at all times. It's understandable why all these experts who want to gatekeep don't like AI, but ultimately, AI will win out, it's just too good.

sph

On a similar note, is there any distro that explicitly has banned usage of generative AI for their project? Asking for a friend.

matheusmoreira

> The Debian Project nevertheless expects that all contributions submitted to Debian, regardless of how and with which tools they were produced, satisfy the same standards of quality, correctness, maintainability, and legal compliance. A quality based filter. Excellent. > The use of a generative AI tool does not diminish the contributor's responsibility for the work they submit. Absolutely. Thanks, Debian!

sheepscreek

Better heads prevail - this is a good start and the right decision. The agent/bot is controlled by some entity, ergo that entity is responsible for everything it does. I relate that to how a Physician's Assistant gets their authority to treat patients from the Doctor they work under. The Doctor's credentials are on the line if their PA screws up.

DarmokTanagra

Debian Rust rewrite incoming.