Hi Stefan, From personal side, I completely agree with you. I am giving potential options only to address concerns like - new contributors overwhelming the community with AI generated PRs just to show as add-on in their profile and vanish after that, or purely AI opened PRs without developer review or understanding. But the later can happen with anyone including committers due to workload/deadlines or misled by AI etc. Also, someone can copy a AI generated patch line by line skipping comments, which looks like a handwritten code.
Thanks, Shailaja > On Sep 28, 2026, at 12:23 PM, Štefan Miklošovič <[email protected]> > wrote: > >> - Only Cassandra committers may submit AI-assisted PRs. This would mean new >> contributors first write and understand code without AI before becoming >> committers; or >> - Contributors may submit AI-assisted changes in a component/subcomponent >> only after they have submitted at least one non-AI PR in that >> component/subcomponent. > > I am not sure if I am missing something but can you all explain in > simple terms how is this actually enforceable in practice? > > "Only Cassandra committers may submit AI-assisted PRs" - there is no > restriction who can create a PR and how. It is not like we see that a > PR is created with heavy AI usage, then we check if a contributor is a > committer and when they are not we comment on that PR saying - "hold > your horses mate, we checked the list and you are not a committer, > sorry, we have to close this". > > If a PR is crafted "carefuly" then it might look like a completely > legitimate piece of work while it is still 100% prompted and the > author does not have a clue what they did. I mean ... how do you make > the difference between what is "real" and what is AI-driven 100%? I > think that even if we "guessed" which one is which, the possibility to > see this is being progressively erased as this tech is evolving and we > will eventually not have a clue.
