alamb commented on code in PR #48952: URL: https://github.com/apache/arrow/pull/48952#discussion_r2719190201
########## docs/source/developers/overview.rst: ########## @@ -146,6 +146,43 @@ will merge the pull request. This is done with a description, a link back to the pull request, and attribution to the contributor and any co-authors. +.. _ai-generated-code: + +AI-generated code ++++++++++++++++++ + +We recognise that AI coding assistants are now a regular part of many +developers' workflows and can improve productivity. Thoughtful use of these +tools can be beneficial, but AI-generated PRs can sometimes lead to +undesirable additional maintainer burden. PRs that appear to be fully +generated by AI with little to no engagement from the author may be closed +without further review. + +Human-generated mistakes tend to be easier to spot and reason about, and +code review often feels like a collaborative learning experience that +benefits both submitter and reviewer. When a PR appears to have been +generated without much engagement from the submitter, reviewers with access +to AI tools could more efficiently generate the code directly. + +We are not opposed to the use of AI tools in generating PRs, but recommend +the following: + +* Only take on a PR if you are able to debug and own the changes yourself - Review Comment: instead of "take on" maybe "submit' might better capture what you are trying to do ########## docs/source/developers/overview.rst: ########## @@ -146,6 +146,43 @@ will merge the pull request. This is done with a description, a link back to the pull request, and attribution to the contributor and any co-authors. +.. _ai-generated-code: + +AI-generated code ++++++++++++++++++ + +We recognise that AI coding assistants are now a regular part of many +developers' workflows and can improve productivity. Thoughtful use of these +tools can be beneficial, but AI-generated PRs can sometimes lead to +undesirable additional maintainer burden. PRs that appear to be fully +generated by AI with little to no engagement from the author may be closed +without further review. + +Human-generated mistakes tend to be easier to spot and reason about, and +code review often feels like a collaborative learning experience that +benefits both submitter and reviewer. When a PR appears to have been +generated without much engagement from the submitter, reviewers with access +to AI tools could more efficiently generate the code directly. Review Comment: ```suggestion Human-generated mistakes tend to be easier to spot and reason about, and code review is intended to be a collaborative learning experience that benefits both submitter and reviewer. When a PR appears to have been generated without much engagement from the submitter, reviewers with access to AI tools could more efficiently generate the code directly. ``` -- This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service. To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the URL above to go to the specific comment. To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at: [email protected]
