Policy on accepting PRs that include LLM generated code?

[astatide]

Hello!

I've just been checking out Helix recently, and I quite enjoy what I've seen so far! It's fast, intuitive, ships a lot of nice defaults, and works well with what I've used it for thus far!

I apologize if this has been asked before (I was unable to find anything discussing it previously); I was curious if the project had any specific guidelines on whether it would be utilizing LLMs as part of the development process, or whether the project would accept PRs that had involved Claude, CoPilot, ChatGPT, etc, in some fashion?

(My own personal interest in asking is that I am actively disinterested in using software stacks that incorporate the usage of LLMs anymore than I am forced to).

Thank you!

[the-mikedavis]

We don't currently have a policy but there have been more and more PRs and other interaction (comments, issues, etc.) that seem LLM-generated so I think it's getting time to adopt one. @archseer and I were discussing this the other day and we like Ghostty's policy: https://github.com/ghostty-org/ghostty/blob/main/AI_POLICY.md.

I think LLMs are good at certain tasks like building timelines or helping you dig into unfamiliar code. But it's very easy to abuse them to waste peoples' time. And I find the output quality pretty questionable most of the time.

[Efimero]

I have used helix for all of a month, specifically because it was not tainted by LLM shenanigans, so if it's tainted, I'll just stop using it...
I'll go back to EDIT.EXE for MS-DOS if that's what I have to do to get away from LLMs...

[okennedy]

I've been using Helix for the better part of a few months. It's the editor that finally got me to give up emacs keybindings for modal editing, and I haven't looked back. LSP integration makes sense as an extensibility model -- it's as powerful, but not nearly as magical as Sublime or emacs (in a good way).

Others above have already addressed how LLM corps are having negative impacts on the environment and open commons. I'll merely state that I do my best, as an individual to avoid LLM-contaminated work on ethical grounds...

... but there's a far more pragmatic reason to reject them: AI code contributions are not a good sign for the health of a project. Creating maintainable code (that is, maintainable without shelling out for a Claude/Gemini/etc... subscription) with an AI is presently hard. Numerous projects have complained about the maintenance overhead of trying to sort through AI slop pushes. Just cut it off at the source.

There's also this well sourced list of complains.

[bigleanator]

I have used helix for almost a year. I think rejecting AI contributions of any kind is the right call.

[darthmall]

I'll just add another vote in favor of standing against generative AI contributions because of the negative social and environmental impacts of the current wave of generative AI products.

[dmbfm]

I really hope we can stand against AI contributions. I love Helix but if LLM contributions are not blocked I'll just have to move on to another editor.

[wolfskaempf]

As a long time helix user who tries to avoid LLM poisoned code as much as practicable, I would be sad to see anything except a hard no-LLM stance from this wonderful project.

The points I would make to support this have already been made above so I won’t repeat them, but one thing I would like to add: Just as with asbestos there were even many people trying to do the right thing, but didn’t know yet about all the harm it causes. With LLM generated text that looks like code we’ve already found many harms today, the low hanging fruit, the long term harm will only become visible later and I would love to see helix survive long-term.

thanks ❤️

[lumi-me-not]

I feel it would be completely unacceptable for the project to endorse GenAI in any way. This technology is deeply unethical and should be avoided as much as possible.

At the very least, the project shouldn't allow GenAI contributions. Even better would be to be clearly against it in its entirely.

I've already made a post at #15408 (reply in thread) but as there still has not been any response, I'm making a top-level one.

[mattly]

Helix is now listed on open slopware. They have a procedure for getting delisted:

Any project here may be removed as long as the following become true, even if prior LLM-authored code remains:

The project establishes a "No genAI" policy, where the core developers commit to no longer using LLMs for developing that project in particular and no longer accepting obvious LLM-authored contributions, and state the policy prominently in their repo.
Any genAI functionality of the project itself is removed in its entirety. "Kill switches" are insufficient.
Any LLM friendly files/folders are either poisoned or removed entirely.
When submitting a project for removal, please include a link to the evidence that they have created a "No genAI" policy. You can also submit PRs to update if a project stops using something like AI Code Reviews, but keeps a Permissive AI policy. Updates are always welcome.

Do you see a project on this list that you wish was not on it? Please consider reaching out in a kind way to suggest they implement a No AI Policy. You can check out our No AI Request Template for inspiration 🙏

[Moth-Tolias]

just to add to the general sentiment here, i was very saddened to learn my previously favorite editor is open to being tainted. i hate to see it go, but without a clear and decisive anti-slop stance - helix cannot stay on my machines.

[chjlsch]

Is there a good reason not to reject LLM generated content? Because by allowing it, helix will loose a lot of passionate users - some of whom donate regularly.