Re: Merging AI-generated program code

Am 01.06.26 um 19:42 schrieb Dan Eble:

> On 2026-06-01 03:49, Lukas-Fabian Moser wrote:
>> Of course, since the number given will (according to your proposal) 
>> influence how the MR is dealt with, we depend on getting an honest 
>> answer to that question. I don't want to seem paranoid, but maybe it 
>> would be wise to add - somewhere in the CG - a statement along the 
>> lines of: Commits with non-disclosed AI-generated code get refused 
>> (or may get reverted later).
> I'd perceive that notice as unwelcoming.  If the answer is missing we 
> could just draw attention to it gently.  I'm sure someone will 
> eventually accidentally delete the question while editing their 
> summary and need just a nudge about it.
>
> If we ever find something that shouldn't have been merged, we should 
> just revert it.  We don't need to give notice.

I wasn't concerned so much about missing answers than about stricter 
endorsement demands for AI-generated MRs possibly being an incentive to 
not disclose the AI involvement truthfully.

But your point is fair, of course: We should neither be unwelcoming, nor 
should we assume the worst in people.

>> In the discussions of the current MR I noticed the term 
>> "AI-assisted". Maybe it would we a good idea to distinguish various 
>> kinds and degrees of AI assistance: IIUC, not every way of using an 
>> LLM during development leads to longer, coherent blocks of AI 
>> generated code.
> Good point.  I think it would be best if the question in the MR 
> template didn't demand a lot of thought to answer or interpret.  I 
> wouldn't want people splitting hairs or making accusations like, "but 
> you said 50%, this is closer to 75%."
>
> I suggested "AI-generated" because "AI-assisted" sounds broader than I 
> care about.  I don't care if someone has used AI to analyze code and 
> explore solutions.  I care about what I am reviewing.  If it's 
> generated content that hasn't been under a critical eye yet, that's 
> important.

Agreed. These distinctions and explanations would probably be a good 
addition to the CG eventually, though.

Lukas