Hi, On Fri, Aug 21, 2026 at 2:28 PM Emond Papegaaij <[email protected]> wrote:
> > > > Do we need to agree on giving Claude the right to push to Wicket? > > > > I've setup very strict guardrails on what Claude can and cannot do without > my explicit consent. It is not allow to push anything without me explicitly > telling to do so. However, if you tell it to push, you need to be careful > to mention on which branches en which remote. I failed to do so, so it > misunderstood me and pushed directly to the real branches. This was solely > on me not being careful with my prompt. I do recommend to prevent Claude > from committing without consent also. I sign all my commits and I forbid > Claude to commit without signing. My key is always locked, so Claude needs > me to unlock my key. A very simple but effective safeguard. Without commits > it can't push either. > > Emond > Hi Emond... my concern was not regarding quality... I'm 100% sure you will double check everything. I was thinking more about authorship. What is the Apache Foundation's policy regarding this? Is the code generated by Claude open source? Did Claude pass the Apache voting to become a committer somehow? Or is Claude considered a contributor? For sure Claude should not be allowed to push to master or any other release branch (as Claude was not accepted as a Wicket commiter). Thus, it would be good to know the Apache Foundation's policy regarding AI-authored code. And who owns the code created by Claude. -- Regards - Ernesto Reinaldo Barreiro Apache Wicket Committer Emerging artist https://www.instagram.com/reinaldo.barreiro.art/
