Add AI policy

[NeffIsBack]

Description

Unfortunately, due to the increase of low effort AI contributions, we are at a point where we have to implement an AI policy.
@mitchellh pretty much perfectly phrased it in this Pull Request: ghostty-org/ghostty#10412

The rise of agentic programming has eliminated the natural effort-based backpressure that previously limited low-effort contributions. It is now too easy to create large amounts of bad content with minimal effort.

Open source projects have always had poor quality issues, PRs, etc. That comes with the territory. Unfortunately, the ease and carelessness by which these are now manifested has increased the "bad" count by 10x if not more. It's ruining it for the rest of us. This policy is a result of the bad, and I'm sorry about it.

Going forward, AI generated contributions will only be allowed for accepted issues and maintainers. Drive-by pull requests with AI generated content will be immediately closed.

Going further, users who contribute bad AI generated content will be immediately banned from all future contributions. This is a zero-tolerance policy. If you use AI, you are responsible for the quality of your contributions. If you're using low-effort AI to create low-effort content, I have no human obligation to help you.

If you are a junior developer who is really trying to learn and get better, then please put aside the AI, do your best, and I will still help. I want to help. But I expect effort and organic thinking in return.

Important:
This is not an anti-AI stance. This is an anti-idiot stance. Ghostty is written with plenty of AI assistance and many of our maintainers use AI daily. We just want quality contributions, regardless of how they are made.

As a solution we adapt this policy as well with this PR.

[Marshall-Hallenbeck]

Submitted my general ideas and feedback. Overall I think we should be more lenient to people (give them one warning and refer to our policy), and also update some wording because I just don't trust AI tooling for a lot of things, especially niche areas like what we do with NetExec.

[Marshall-Hallenbeck]

@mpgn @zblurx I would also like to hear your guys thoughts on this

[tiagomanunes]

Out of curiosity, why ask what tool was used ? I see it's also in the original policy from ghostty, so maybe you've just decided to keep it the same, but I see @Marshall-Hallenbeck also suggesting asking about the models used. To be clear, I agree with the policy, but given that the motivation (as quoted also from ghostty) is about ensuring the quality of the submission, why does the tool/model matter?

[NeffIsBack]

Out of curiosity, why ask what tool was used ? I see it's also in the original policy from ghostty, so maybe you've just decided to keep it the same, but I see @Marshall-Hallenbeck also suggesting asking about the models used. To be clear, I agree with the policy, but given that the motivation (as quoted also from ghostty) is about ensuring the quality of the submission, why does the tool/model matter?

Good question. @Marshall-Hallenbeck do we want/need that?

A thought: might be interesting to see what the overall quality is depending on the model/tool. I could imagine something like "I just asked chatgpt" result in worse quality (due to lack of effort/knowledge) than someone perhaps using specific agents or something else.

[zblurx]

To be honest I rarely review PR these days. But I totally agree with the policy change to adapt to the current coding trends. Reviewing and merging PR is already time consuming, we don't need vibecoding to make it harder

[Marshall-Hallenbeck]

Out of curiosity, why ask what tool was used ? I see it's also in the original policy from ghostty, so maybe you've just decided to keep it the same, but I see @Marshall-Hallenbeck also suggesting asking about the models used. To be clear, I agree with the policy, but given that the motivation (as quoted also from ghostty) is about ensuring the quality of the submission, why does the tool/model matter?

Good question. @Marshall-Hallenbeck do we want/need that?

A thought: might be interesting to see what the overall quality is depending on the model/tool. I could imagine something like "I just asked chatgpt" result in worse quality (due to lack of effort/knowledge) than someone perhaps using specific agents or something else.

A few reasons, first being my curiosity of what people are using.
Second, what you (Neff) said about quality of the tool/model; if we notice someone is using a terrible tool/model, that might reflect on the quality of the PR, so we could suggest a better tool that might help them improve it.
Third, sort of related to the second point, if something is actually really good at helping develop for NetExec, I'd like to check it out myself.

[Marshall-Hallenbeck]

@NeffIsBack can you review my most recent changes?

[NeffIsBack]

@NeffIsBack can you review my most recent changes?

Done, had a few thoughts, rest sounds good 👍

[NeffIsBack]

@Marshall-Hallenbeck looks good from my side. Imo we can merge