Submissions via AI

AI is advancing rapidly, and that is hard to deny. At the same time, it is important to set clear boundaries on how it is used. LabNex, as a project, is not against using AI tools for code generation or assistance. However, there are limits, and some practices are simply not acceptable.

This is an open-source project, but that does not mean there are always multiple contributors actively maintaining it. In many cases, it may be just one person reviewing and managing contributions. Because of this, there is limited capacity to review pull requests that are entirely generated by AI, especially when the submitter has not taken the time to understand what the code does or how it fits into the project.

Before submitting a pull request, ask yourself: have you taken the time to read and understand the codebase? Do you understand how it is structured and what the requirements are? Or did you simply ask an AI tool to generate something without reviewing it yourself? The latter is not acceptable. If the code does not follow the project’s architecture or shows no understanding of the existing code, it will not be reviewed and may be closed without further notice. This is not meant to discourage contributions, but to respect the time and effort of everyone involved.

Using AI as a tool is fine, but it is your responsibility to refine, test, and adapt that code. Submissions should reflect your understanding and effort. That means reviewing the generated code, making it consistent with the existing codebase, and ensuring it has been properly analyzed, debugged, and tested.

In short, LabNex does not reject AI-assisted contributions. What it does reject is unreviewed, unrefined AI-generated code that adds noise to the project and wastes contributors’ time.

AI contributions are fine as long as the above guidelines are followed, but AI-generated slop is not.