i wonder how they will detect it though. is there some good tool to tell them if code files someone submit were outputs or altered by LLMs?

Well, that's their prerogative, I guess. But the burden of proof will be on them, of course. They can't expect users to prove a negative. There are simple tells that would reveal a lot of projects. Claude Code's moronic defaults of littering commit messages with both a CC author trailer as well as a session link will reveal some, but those are easy to disable. Then there is stuff like prolific comments, em-dashes in comments, etc.. but none of those are real proof that a project was built with agents.

Either way, I was never interested in codeberg and this just means that I'm less interested.

I'll add my comment from a previous thread:

This is a bit strange. Are they saying that Codeberg no longer accepts vibe coded projects at all?

If so, it seems kind of short sighted. Within a very short period of time all code will be AI code. What then?

And as the models improve, along with better code will come better bug fixing etc etc. So the quality of AI code will absolutely surpass that of human code. What then?

Will the repositories demand proof of programming ability? Why, when AI will be handling everything anyway. It would be rather like driving schools mandating that all drivers can strip an engine before they're allowed to drive? Very odd.