dimas-b commented on code in PR #3948: URL: https://github.com/apache/polaris/pull/3948#discussion_r2927577625
########## CONTRIBUTING.md: ########## @@ -119,6 +119,16 @@ Tips: * Keep in mind that the Git commit subject and message is going to be read by other people, potentially even after years. The Git commit subject and message will appear "as is" in release notes. * Make sure the subject and message are properly formatted and contains a concise description of the changes in way that someone who has no prior knowledge can understand the rationale of the change and the change itself. Remove information that's of no use for someone reading the Git commit log, for example single intermediate commit messages like `formatting` or `fix test`. +#### Guidelines for AI-assisted Contributions + +Contributors may use a variety of tools when preparing changes to Polaris, including AI systems (e.g., large language models or code assistants). Contributors using such systems are expected to adhere to the following principles: + +* Regardless of how a change is produced, the individual submitting the pull request is considered the author of the contribution and is fully responsible for it. +* The pull request author **must understand the implementation end-to-end** and be able to **explain and justify the design and code** during review. +* Tools, including AI systems, **are not** considered contributors. **Responsibility and authorship remain with the human** submitting the change. +* Contributors are encouraged to **disclose** significant AI assistance in the pull request description for transparency. Review Comment: The header problem exists, I think. So I think we need to resolve it and provide clear guidelines for contributors who want to use AI-generated code. Deferring it will make reviewing PRs with known AI-generated code pretty much impossible. Re: comparison with OpenAPI code generation, from my POV the key distinction is that build-time tools (like OpenAPI generator) produce code that is not meant to be edited after generation. Any updates to sources require re-generating that code. On the other hand, AI-generated code is meant to be committed to the source repo like any human-written code, so it will be subject to editing and copying by (other) people after the initial contribution. Not having a copyright header will make the status of subsequent manual edits obscure. I believe manual edits should be covered by the normal ASF license, so a header would be valuable in these files... WDYT? I agree that this discussion is growing in scope, but I think it is beneficial to the project even if it takes time to figure this out. -- 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]
