Isn't it more reasonable to explain in excruciating detail what kind of contributions you will allow?
No, it's not. You can read the rule as "If it's obvious enough your code has been LLM-generated, you will get banned" if you feel like the conciseness of the current rule makes you uneasy about using Copilot.
Besides, I suspect in the maintainer's case, banning unreviewed LLM contributions is effectively congruent to banning all LLM contributions.
If you think the rule is unfair towards LLMs because they can do such good, feel free to open a good, clean, useful PR clearly stating how you used the LLM to generate code.
Comments
No, it's not. You can read the rule as "If it's obvious enough your code has been LLM-generated, you will get banned" if you feel like the conciseness of the current rule makes you uneasy about using Copilot.
Besides, I suspect in the maintainer's case, banning unreviewed LLM contributions is effectively congruent to banning all LLM contributions.
If you think the rule is unfair towards LLMs because they can do such good, feel free to open a good, clean, useful PR clearly stating how you used the LLM to generate code.