doc: Contributor guide for AI-generated PRs #18237
Conversation
github-actions
bot
added
the
documentation
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Generally this is great! I think we should get some more feedback but move to merge this quickly and iterate on it if we have to since it's just documentation.
My personal small suggestion would be to prohibit AI generated comments or responses to review. AI generated summaries in the PR description are probably good, humans myself included are pretty lazy about writing detailed descriptions, AI is great at it and it can end up in the commit message as well which is good for browsing git history. Other than that I expect to be conversing with a human when I ask a question. I don't see any scenario where AI generated comments are helpful, other than for translation / language reasons. I don't feel strongly about this, if there's any opposition let's leave it out.
Co-authored-by: Adrian Garcia Badaracco <[email protected]>
Co-authored-by: Adrian Garcia Badaracco <[email protected]>
Thanks for the review! +1 for no AI responses to review. However, sometimes I feel AI can't really generate a good PR summary, it's mostly repeating code details, but not to capture the important insights behind it to make the PR more approachable to reviewers. I think it would be an interesting discussion around "How to write a good PR description", like the discussion in #18095 |
|
|
||
| ### Better ways to contribute than an “AI dump” | ||
|
|
||
| It's recommended to write a high-quality issue with a clear problem statement and a minimal, reproducible example. This can make it easier for others to contribute. |
Co-authored-by: Alex Huang <[email protected]>
Co-authored-by: Andrew Lamb <[email protected]>
Co-authored-by: Andrew Lamb <[email protected]>
## Which issue does this PR close? <!-- We generally require a GitHub issue to be filed for all bug fixes and enhancements and this helps us generate change logs for our releases. You can link an issue to this PR using the GitHub syntax. For example `Closes apache#123` indicates that this PR will close issue apache#123. --> Part of apache#18095 ## Rationale for this change <!-- Why are you proposing this change? If this is already explained clearly in the issue then this section is not needed. Explaining clearly why changes are proposed helps reviewers understand your changes and offer better suggestions for fixes. --> ## What changes are included in this PR? <!-- There is no need to duplicate the description in the issue here but it is sometimes worth providing a summary of the individual changes in this PR. --> In the contributor guide documentation, better explain why large AI-generated PRs without understanding should be rejected. See more in the original issue discussion. ## Are these changes tested? <!-- We typically require tests for all PRs in order to: 1. Prevent the code from being accidentally broken by subsequent changes 2. Serve as another way to document the expected behavior of the code If tests are not included in your PR, please explain why (for example, are they covered by existing tests)? --> ## Are there any user-facing changes? <!-- If there are user-facing changes then we may require documentation to be updated before approving the PR. --> <!-- If there are any breaking changes to public APIs, please add the `api change` label. --> --------- Co-authored-by: Adrian Garcia Badaracco <[email protected]> Co-authored-by: Alex Huang <[email protected]> Co-authored-by: Andrew Lamb <[email protected]>
6 participants
Which issue does this PR close?
Part of #18095
Rationale for this change
What changes are included in this PR?
In the contributor guide documentation, better explain why large AI-generated PRs without understanding should be rejected. See more in the original issue discussion.
Are these changes tested?
Are there any user-facing changes?