The Zig community is decentralized. Anyone is free to start and maintain their own community, which is not subject to these rules.
This document contains the rules that govern these spaces only:
The ziglang organization on Codeberg
#zig IRC channel on Libera.chat
Zig project development Zulip chat
The rules here are strict. This space is for focused, on topic, technical work on the Zig project only. It is everyone’s responsibility to maintain a positive environment, especially when disagreements occur.
Strict No LLM / No AI Policy
No LLM-generated content, whether it be code or prose.
No paraphrasing LLM-generated content.
No LLMs for editing, including fixing spelling or grammatical errors.
No LLMs for translation. English is encouraged, but not required. You are welcome to post in your native language and rely on others to have their own translation tools of choice to interpret your words.
No LLMs for brainstorming and then sharing the results of that brainstorming, even if you create the prose. If you use a chatbot to give you advice on a comment on the issue tracker, that comment is unwelcome.
No LLMs for finding bugs.
No talking about use of chatbot/LLM services.
Over the last several years we have become overwhelmed by the large number of code contributions (pull requests), especially those from new contributors. The number of open PRs has become a meme in the community. In part, the number of open PRs is a healthy sign that:
People are interested in contributing to Godot and are willing to put in time to contribute,
We are being cautious about feature creep,
We are dedicated to high code quality.
But ultimately, a large part of the backlog comes from the fact that the number of qualified reviewers is small, reviewing PRs is demanding, and we can’t keep up with everything coming in.
This problem is compounded by the recent increase in AI-generated contributions, both by AI agents and by humans submitting AI-generated code. The amount of effort required to make a PR has gone down (and number of PRs has increased as a result), while the amount of work to review PRs and the amount of people available to review has stayed the same. This reviewer shortage was already a problem, but it was one that we successfully ignored. We can no longer ignore it.