本文为原文前 6,000 字符的节选翻译，完整内容请查看原文。

QGIS enacts moratorium on AI contributions

Conversation nyalldawson commented Sep 24, 2026. Followup discussion at https://lists.osgeo.org/pipermail/qgis-developer/2026-September/068576.html. This formally changes the AI policy to a strict “NOT ALLOWED” policy.

nyalldawson 于 2026 年 9 月 24 日发表评论。后续讨论请见 https://lists.osgeo.org/pipermail/qgis-developer/2026-September/068576.html。此举正式将 AI 政策更改为严格的“禁止使用”政策。

haubourg commented Sep 24, 2026. Hi, maybe this strong take deserves a bit of context of why we want to go further than the previous “Human in the loop” policy. AI use from external contributors puts a massive and unbearable pressure on the shoulders of our maintainers, who already had a tough job before the era of LLMs. AI stream is a lot higher than what human review can take seriously, leading to either a longer list of un-reviewed PRs or not fully reviewed code and quality issues. Both things we don’t want in the project.

haubourg 于 2026 年 9 月 24 日发表评论。大家好，也许这种强硬的态度需要一些背景说明，解释为什么我们要比之前的“人在回路”政策更进一步。外部贡献者使用 AI 给我们的维护者带来了巨大且难以承受的压力，他们在 LLM 时代之前就已经工作繁重了。AI 生成的内容流远超人类评审所能认真处理的范围，导致未评审的 PR 列表变长，或者出现未完全评审的代码和质量问题。这两者都是我们不希望在项目中看到的。

Free software communities are built on human network. 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, and keep having enough bandwidth to be welcoming to human contributions. So, for this reason, a huge +1 for me.

自由软件社区建立在人际网络之上。QGIS 受到组织的信任，因为他们知道可以回馈项目，可以雇佣贡献者进行支持、培训和功能开发。作为一个社区项目，这是我们非常想要保护的东西，我们要保持足够的带宽来欢迎人类的贡献。因此，出于这个原因，我投下巨大的赞成票。

timlinux commented Sep 24, 2026. Thank you @nyalldawson - hopefully having a short paragraph like this rather than a long essay cut out any confusion!

timlinux 于 2026 年 9 月 24 日发表评论。感谢 @nyalldawson ——希望用这样一段简短的文字而不是长篇大论，能消除任何困惑！

vpicavet commented Sep 24, 2026. Does that include any contribution to issue content, comments, PRs? Also, we should also include the QEP repository at least.

vpicavet 于 2026 年 9 月 24 日发表评论。这是否包括对问题内容、评论和 PR 的任何贡献？此外，我们至少应该将 QEP 仓库也包含在内。

Amalvir commented Sep 24, 2026. Hi, I am directly concerned by this new policy, and it’s also a +1 for me. When I created my 2 AI-assisted regressions-fix PRs to investigate the cause of the bugs, suggest fixes, and review the code, I didn’t realize the harm this could cause to QGIS’s already fragile reviewer community. I’m clearly not yet skilled enough to fix bugs in a project as complex as QGIS, but LLMs give you the illusion that it’s possible.

Amalvir 于 2026 年 9 月 24 日发表评论。大家好，我与这项新政策直接相关，我也投赞成票。当我创建那两个 AI 辅助的回归修复 PR 来调查错误原因、建议修复方案并审查代码时，我没有意识到这会对 QGIS 本已脆弱的评审者社区造成伤害。显然，我还没有足够的技能去修复 QGIS 这样复杂项目中的错误，但 LLM 给了你一种“这完全可行”的错觉。

By doing this, we’ve broken a trust contract between the reviewer and the contributor. The contract that, to contribute at such a big project, you know what you’re doing. I guess there’s a second effect but I didn’t read much online: by making this kind of ease available, contributors using AI learn very little/nothing and don’t build up their skills on the project. They can never really hope to become reviewers themselves, and the community stagnates.

通过这样做，我们打破了评审者和贡献者之间的信任契约。契约的内容是：要为如此大的项目做出贡献，你必须知道自己在做什么。我想还有第二个影响，但我没在网上读到太多：通过提供这种便利，使用 AI 的贡献者学到的东西很少甚至什么都没学到，也没有在项目中积累技能。他们永远无法真正希望成为评审者，社区也会因此停滞不前。

haubourg commented Sep 24, 2026. Does that include any contribution to issue content, comments, PRs? I would agree with this, though 100% of the submitted security advisories are written using AI since we started with this system. (most concern our websites, not QGIS core though).

haubourg 于 2026 年 9 月 24 日发表评论。这是否包括对问题内容、评论和 PR 的任何贡献？我同意这一点，尽管自从我们开始使用该系统以来，100% 提交的安全公告都是使用 AI 编写的。（不过大多数涉及我们的网站，而不是 QGIS 核心）。

kannes commented Sep 24, 2026. Please do not misunderstand my criticism below. I consider the current craziness around “AI” to be a huge problem in many ways, ethical, societal, economical etc. And I see the huge and unfair pressure that its abuse creates on.

kannes 于 2026 年 9 月 24 日发表评论。请不要误解我下面的批评。我认为目前围绕“AI”的疯狂在伦理、社会、经济等许多方面都是一个巨大的问题。而且我看到了滥用 AI 给（维护者）带来的巨大且不公平的压力。