Re: Integrating AI assisted code review for PR in OSGeo/GDAL?

Kurt Schwehr via gdal-dev <[email protected]>
Newsgroups gmane.comp.gis.gdal.devel
Message-ID <CACmBxyvTkU14HPWqcoH2FN2rtE1e65qwDy1ojUcsrRzxC_pnfQ@mail.gmail.com>
My personal take:

I have been using Gemini based code reviews in addition to humans for more
than 6 months in other code bases. They have gradually gotten a lot better.
It started off with 5-10% of the review comments being useful. Now it's
more like 75% of the comments are useful. However, I occasionally end up
spending significant time figuring out that something that sounds right
isn't quite right for the code at hand. Or more challenging are responding
to humans who insist I address AI generated comments (I've been that person
too...)

Overall, it's been a win in getting a lot of little bugs out of code and
some of those bugs have been in the code for more than a decade. Just be
ready to ignore a lot of AI comments.

-Kurt

On Thu, Apr 2, 2026 at 6:43 AM Even Rouault via gdal-dev <
[email protected]> wrote:

> Hi,
>
> I think it could be worth to have the *possibility* of requiring an AI
> assisted review for pull requests, directly available from our canonical
> repo. I've been occasionaly experimenting Gemini Code Assist and Copilot
> in my personal fork. Copilot had repeated failures a few weeks ago but
> seems to have been fixed recently, so I've more experience with /gemini
> review. I find it useful and it has spotted real issues, some of them
> would have probably went unnoticed during classic human review, and with
> an acceptable rate of false positives or debatable remarks.
>
> So my proposal would be to have the tool(s)  enabled in OSGeo/GDAL repo,
> *on demand* (not sure if that's possible for Copilot. Is that a setting?
> Although I'm not trusting github enough to be sure if we want to
> increase our use of it.  Gemini review is definitely on demand and an
> external github app we can disable in one click) for developers or
> reviewers that want to trigger them. I don't think having them to run
> systematically is a good idea, because some PRs are too trivial to get
> any benefit from them, and having them enabled systematically lead to
> noise as PR comments and notifications.
>
> I definitely don't think those tools should replace human review. AI
> tools are instructed to flatter your ego and will never say your PR is a
> bad idea, which a human reviewer will occasionally say. Or they lack the
> global picture, etc. I see them as additional tools on top of our CI
> instrumentation and human review.
>
> Anyone with experience in that area and thoughts?
>
> Even
>
> --
> http://www.spatialys.com
> My software is free, but my time generally not.
>
> _______________________________________________
> gdal-dev mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/gdal-dev
>

_______________________________________________
gdal-dev mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/gdal-dev
lmpx.com only provides a reader for public news (NNTP) servers. It is not affiliated with the servers or forums shown here and is not responsible for the content of articles, which is written by their respective authors.