QGIS bans AI-assisted contributions to protect its maintainers

QGIS bans AI assisted contributions

QGIS has adopted QEP428, a policy that strictly prohibits AI-assisted contributions. The move follows pressure on maintainers from a flood of AI-generated pull requests and a desire to preserve human community trust. While some worry the ban is too broad, backers call it a necessary stopgap until the long-term effects of AI on open source are understood.

yes, we are aware we might throw the baby with the bathwater, but the baby might be non-viable, so...
  1. jcolot

    Part of this is an alignment problem, but on the human side: the bottleneck is no longer writing code but staying aligned with it, knowing what it does and whether it does what you meant. In my own work, that’s now most of the job, even for code I asked for. For maintainers reviewing large PRs from strangers, it's certainly much worse. A ban is bit harsh, but I understand why they’re rationing their attention.

  2. mootothemax

    There’s something about geospatial work that seems to break LLMs. I’ve experienced it a lot with latest versions of both Fable and Opus, and it’s the classic nightmare of confidently-spoken-but-wrong.

    Yesterday, I had a relatively trivial bit of work in play using distance-weighting to measure stuff, and Claude did really well / but right at the end, despite having a success metric and lots of great results matching it, Claude insisted my maths was wrong and needed changing.

    When i asked why, and pointed out that the suggested replacement would cancel out the distance-weighting entirely, it immediately agreed with me and asked to write its fifth project memory about it.

    The other big ones it tends to mess up on without strict guardrails are coordinate systems; and measurements, often converting back and forth between a given nation grid and wgs84 latitude/longitude in ways that lose good amounts of precision; and then custom-coding haversine-equivalents to measure a distance that’s otherwise be a simple subtraction via the national grid coordinates. It’s baffling.

  3. leothetechguy

    Why is everybody all the time in favour of AI on HN? This is objectively a good change because it will improve the quality of the code in the long term.

  4. throwaway2037

    More LLM allergies.

    Look at this PR: https://github.com/qgis/QGIS/pull/67731/files

    The code change is so simple that Claude today could easily write this code. How will they know if an LLM wrote the code? They won't. And this policy will age like milk: Each passing month, coding LLMs are improving. It will become more difficult to "detect" an LLM-authored submission.

    The best LLM policy that I have seen for an open source project is Linux. Roughly: You can use LLMs, but you are fully responsible for the code it produces. Linus acknowledges both positives and negatives to LLMs.

  5. KolmogorovComp

    I think this is the end of open-contributions, the maintainers already having too much on their plate.

    Plus it is becoming exceedingly rare of finding a contributor that save time, as in can do better than the maintainer itself using LLM and reviewing it itself.

  6. Hendrikto

    For those who, like me, had no idea what QGIS was: It is a free Geographic Information System (GIS), which means that it deals with creating, managing, analyzing, storing, and visualizing geospatial information. Think of (3D) maps and stuff like that.

  7. alexwebb2

    > QGIS is trusted by organisations because they know they can contribute back, they can hire contributors for support, training and feature. As a community project, this is something we really want to protect

    Ok, so there’s a financial motive here, where they’re worried that allowing more open contributions will diminish the value of their expertise and reduce their employability. To be fair to them, that’s probably true.

  8. jerkstate

    I implemented css geometry properties for svg2 in resvg with claude. I know it works and I've read the relatively small diff. But I'm afraid to send a PR because it might offend a artisanal handcrafted free-range software enthusiast. I guess any other AI enjoyer who needs this feature, which is standard functionality in svg2, will just burn a few tokens and do it themselves to keep the luddites from smashing the factories.

  9. robertclaus

    At Plotly we are dealing with similar issues. We're doing our best to keep up, but it's genuinely hard not to just cut our losses on passer-by community contributions. 3 page issue writeups nobody has proofread, nobody but a bot to follow up with when we try, huge volume of plausible but weak PRs eating up reviewer time. All while we have core work we really want to be focused on rather than merging another bug fix we don't expect anyone but this bot has really run into.

  10. stevex

    I'd love to know more about the process that the storytold team is using to build the Artcraft apps.

    https://github.com/storytold

    They're producing a fantastic quantity of software, and the quality seems higher than you'd expect for the velocity they're building at.

More from this day

2026-10-12