GitHub user sshiv012 edited a comment on the discussion: AI-generated descriptions in issues and PRs
I looked at a few approaches. [Team NewPipe](https://github.com/TeamNewPipe/NewPipe/blob/dev/.github/CONTRIBUTING.md) prohibits using generative AI to fill issue or PR templates, while [FastAPI](https://github.com/fastapi/fastapi/security) permits AI assistance for reports but requires human verification and disclosure. [Apache guidance](https://www.apache.org/legal/generative-tooling.html) likewise keeps responsibility for generated material with the contributor. More generally, [GitHub recommends](https://docs.github.com/en/pull-requests/collaborating-with-pull-requests/getting-started/helping-others-review-your-changes) descriptions that let reviewers understand a change quickly. A balanced practice for Texera could be: require a short, human-edited summary first (problem/motivation, proposed change, and how it was verified, I believe we have a template like this for pull requests); put optional implementation detail below; disclose substantial AI assistance; and require the author to understand the submission and answer questions about it. The same compact template could apply whether or not AI was used, since verbosity rather than the tool itself is the immediate readability problem. Alternatively we can also look at [CodeRabbit](https://www.coderabbit.ai/oss). I believe they have a feature specifically aimed at AI slop, but I wouldn't trust any for profit company in terms of sustainable long term future. We'd also have to check if Apache permits this. <img width="399" height="167" alt="image" src="https://github.com/user-attachments/assets/d52bff5a-afb8-4758-bd05-6731597eed2b"; /> GitHub link: https://github.com/apache/texera/discussions/7377#discussioncomment-17927719 ---- This is an automatically sent email for [email protected]. To unsubscribe, please send an email to: [email protected]
