Yes, the html comment would fork fine too.

But mostly I was assuming that the agents would mostly follow the skill and 
existing docs, so we don’t _need_ to do anything else for humans to fill it in, 
as by default they will do that anyway.

> On 24 Sep 2026, at 15:44, Shahar Epstein <[email protected]> wrote:
> 
> Ash - I understand your approach, and not against the formulation that you
> suggested (without headers + changing "Click here" to "AI Summary").
> However, I think that it will be easier for contributors to comprehend that
> they should write the description in their own words if there's an explicit
> instruction for doing that. If you're against headers, it could also be in
> the form of an HTML comment like we already do in other areas (i.e., <!--
> YOU MUST WRITE THIS SECTION WITHOUT LLM -->).
> Personally, I think that headers will have a better effect as they are more
> visible (for both author and reviewers altogether).
> 
> 
> 
> Shahar
> 
> On Thu, Sep 24, 2026 at 5:34 PM Jarek Potiuk <[email protected]> wrote:
> 
>> Hello everyone,
>> 
>> Following the objection in the [LAZY CONSENSUS] thread, I am turning
>> this into a discussion. The change (#73660) has already been reverted
>> in #73669 (thanks Ash) - and apologies for merging it before the lazy
>> consensus ended; I thought it was uncontroversial, which it clearly
>> is not.
>> 
>> The original proposal, for PR descriptions drafted by AI agents:
>> 
>> * The description starts with a short "Human Summary" - a few
>>  sentences typed by the human author, in their own words: why the
>>  change is needed, key decisions, caveats.
>> * The agent-written description stays below it, in an "AI Summary"
>>  section folded by default.
>> * Agents are instructed to ask the author for the Human Summary and
>>  paste it verbatim - never to write, suggest or paraphrase it.
>> 
>> Ash's objection, as I understand it: the PR description should already
>> be written for humans, and it is how the author engages with the
>> community - so an explicitly labelled "Human Summary" reverses the
>> priority. His counter-proposal is to drop both the "Human Summary"
>> and "AI Summary" headers and put the agent text in a folded
>> <details><summary>AI Summary</summary> block.
>> 
>> I see it the other way round. Following the ASF Generative Tooling
>> guidance, we already require every such PR to state that it was
>> generated with AI - the reader knows up front that an agent was
>> involved. Given that, an explicit "Human Summary" is exactly the
>> signal that matters: it shows that the human was driving the change,
>> and that they understand it well enough to summarize - in their own
>> words - what the PR does and why. Without the label, the reader of an
>> AI-disclosed PR has no way to tell which part the author actually
>> wrote. This is the "centaur" - human in control - not the "reverse
>> centaur" or "meat proxy" [1].
>> 
>> Looking at it again, the two proposals are closer than it seems: both
>> put the author's own words on top and fold the agent's text below.
>> The actual differences are:
>> 
>> 1. Should the human-written part be explicitly labelled
>>   ("Human Summary") so it is distinguishable in an AI-disclosed PR,
>>   or just be the unlabelled top of the description?
>> 2. Should the folded agent text be marked "AI Summary" (Ash suggests
>>   the <details> summary label - that part we seem to agree on)?
>> 3. Should agents be required to ask for the human part and refuse to
>>   draft it themselves - or should that be left to the author?
>> 
>> Just to remind - this is **only** for PRs that are agenically generated.
>> If someone creates their PRs manually, without the AI agent, none of
>> this applies.
>> 
>> The template for PRs opened via GH UI is not supposed to have either
>> section.
>> 
>> I'd love to hear what others think - especially those who review a lot
>> of agent-assisted PRs, and Shahar, who has been using this format
>> already.
>> 
>> [1]
>> https://doctorow.medium.com/https-pluralistic-net-2025-09-11-vulgar-thatcherism-there-is-an-alternative-f1428b42a8fd
>> 
>> J.
>> 
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
>> For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
>> 
>> 


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]

Reply via email to