Industry Context
When to Use
Use this when you want to understand how Drupal's approach compares to other major open source projects, or when you need to make arguments for or against specific AI policies in governance discussions.
Decision
| Project | Policy | Key Mechanism | Rationale |
|---|---|---|---|
| QEMU | Ban | Commit policy prohibits AI-generated code (June 2025) | DCO compliance — cannot certify AI output as your own work |
| Gentoo | Ban | Council voted 6-0 to ban (April 2024) | Copyright uncertainty, quality concerns, unable to verify originality |
| Linux kernel | Disclose | Co-developed-by trailer proposed (2025), Signed-off-by required | DCO requires personal certification; AI assistance disclosed via trailers |
| Apache | Disclose | Generated-by trailer convention, ASF guidance document | AI welcome with attribution; committer takes responsibility |
| Drupal | Disclose | Issue template checkboxes, honor system | Transparency-first; human responsible for submitted code |
Pattern
Git Trailers (for repos you control):
# Co-Authored-By — most common, GitHub renders in UI
Co-Authored-By: Claude <noreply@anthropic.com>
# Co-developed-by — Linux kernel style
Co-developed-by: Claude Sonnet 4 <noreply@anthropic.com>
Signed-off-by: Your Name <you@example.com>
# Generated-by — Apache style
Generated-by: Claude Sonnet 4
On drupal.org: Attribution is handled via issue checkboxes, not commit trailers. Maintainers write the final commit message. Use trailers in your own projects.
DCO tension: DCO requires you to certify the contribution is your original work. QEMU says AI-generated code cannot be certified this way. Linux kernel says yes if you take responsibility. Drupal doesn't use DCO but the principle applies: you are responsible for what you submit.
Practical guidance: Treat AI-assisted code as your own. You prompted it, you reviewed it, you submit it, you defend it. If you can't do that, don't submit it.
Common Mistakes
- Wrong: Citing QEMU's ban to argue Drupal should ban AI → Right: Different projects have different governance models — QEMU's DCO-based argument doesn't apply directly to Drupal's credit-based system
- Wrong: Assuming legal questions are settled → Right: Copyright law for AI is actively evolving; don't make definitive legal claims
- Wrong: Ignoring the trend → Right: Most major projects are moving toward disclosure-based policies; bans are increasingly the exception
- Wrong: Not considering DCO implications in your own repos → Right: Even without formal DCO, the principle that you certify your submission matters
See Also
- Overview
- Drupal AI Policy
- Commit Messages
- Reference: Apache AI guidance
- Reference: Linux kernel patches
- Reference: Gentoo AI policy