Hi,
On 7/24/26 4:37 AM, Lorn Potter wrote:
On 21/7/26 22:02, Joerg Bornemann wrote:
On 7/21/26 4:49 AM, Lorn Potter wrote:
On 20/7/26 18:24, Axel Spoerl via Development wrote:
As a reviewer I try to find out quickly whether AI was used as a
tool to enhance productivity, while the developer owns the code.
I think anything not a small patch - medium and large patches,
should be clearly identified in the commit message, that it was
developed in conjunction with a machine or somesuch.
I'm not convinced this would be useful. Such a disclaimer would just
serve as excuse should the developer not fully understand / own the
generated code, which is the situation we should avoid. I'm also not
interested to read in commit messages which IDE, text editor,
operating system was involved in creating the patch. ;)
It serves to alert reviewers. It is always the job of the submitter to
know what they are submitting, regardless if it was assisted by a
machine or some other developer.
As somebody who reviews patches (although in KDE), Assisted-by have
never been useful (except advertising this or that model). Also one can
argue that a reviewer has to be thorough regardless whether the patch is
written by a human or an LLM, otherwise it develops a dangerous habit
where thoroughness is applied selectively.
Regards,
Vlad
--
Development mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.qt-project.org/listinfo/development
