Archives
Contributors
Re: Guidelines for LLM generated contributions
Yes, fully supported. This sounds like basic courtesy, and I like the wording of the guidelines you shared. Alexandre On 9/18/25 09:41, Stefan Rijnhart wrote: > Dear all, > > at least one contributor is planning again to flood the OCA projects > with PRs for module migrations: https://github.com/OCA/web/issues/3285. > This volume is likely made possible through automation, with an LLM > generating the actual migration code (on top of, hopefully, a more > deterministic tool like OCA's odoo-module-migrator). > > Regardless of the volume and the submitter, if the submitter has > reviewed, refined and tested the code generated by an LLM, this should > not be a problem but as a reviewer I'd like to know what I can expect. > Holger Brunn pointed out to me that in other projects, this may be > covered by a demand in the guidelines to disclose LLM usage and its > extend. For an example, see > https://github.com/ghostty-org/ghostty/pull/8289/files. > > I would very much like to see such an addition to the OCA guidelines. > Additionally, I would like to suggest that the basic premise (the > generated code is indeed first self-reviewed, refined and tested) is > also made explicit, and that it is unacceptable to pass on reviewer > comments to the LLM only to copy back the LLM's response (which has > happened to me on one or two occassions). > > Can I have a temperature check for your support for such an addition to > the guidelines? Or do you have other ideas or perspectives on the matter? > > Cheers, > Stefan > > -- Opener B.V. - Business solutions driven by open source collaboration > Stefan Rijnhart - Consultant/developer mail:stefan@opener.amsterdam tel: > +31 (0) 6 1447 8606 web:https://opener.amsterdam > > _______________________________________________ > Mailing-List: https://odoo-community.org/groups/contributors-15 > <https://odoo-community.org/groups/contributors-15> > Post to: mailto:contributors@odoo-community.org > Unsubscribe: https://odoo-community.org/groups?unsubscribe <https:// > odoo-community.org/groups?unsubscribe> > -- Alexandre Fayolle Senior Software Engineer Camptocamp France SAS 18 rue du Lac Saint André 73 370 Le Bourget-du-Lac France http://www.camptocamp.com
by Alexandre Fayolle - 11:21 - 18 Sep 2025
Reference
-
Guidelines for LLM generated contributions
Dear all, at least one contributor is planning again to flood the OCA projects with PRs for module migrations: https://github.com/OCA/web/issues/3285. This volume is likely made possible through automation, with an LLM generating the actual migration code (on top of, hopefully, a more deterministic tool like OCA's odoo-module-migrator). Regardless of the volume and the submitter, if the submitter has reviewed, refined and tested the code generated by an LLM, this should not be a problem but as a reviewer I'd like to know what I can expect. Holger Brunn pointed out to me that in other projects, this may be covered by a demand in the guidelines to disclose LLM usage and its extend. For an example, see https://github.com/ghostty-org/ghostty/pull/8289/files. I would very much like to see such an addition to the OCA guidelines. Additionally, I would like to suggest that the basic premise (the generated code is indeed first self-reviewed, refined and tested) is also made explicit, and that it is unacceptable to pass on reviewer comments to the LLM only to copy back the LLM's response (which has happened to me on one or two occassions). Can I have a temperature check for your support for such an addition to the guidelines? Or do you have other ideas or perspectives on the matter? Cheers, Stefan -- Opener B.V. - Business solutions driven by open source collaboration Stefan Rijnhart - Consultant/developer mail:stefan@opener.amsterdam tel: +31 (0) 6 1447 8606 web:https://opener.amsterdam
by Stefan Rijnhart - 09:40 - 18 Sep 2025