zlacker

>>mefeng+(OP)
TLDR don't be an asshole and produce good stuff. But I have the feeling that this is not the right direction for the future. Distrust the process: only trust the results.

Moreover this policy is strictly unenforceable because good AI use is indistinguishable from good manual coding. And sometimes even the reverse. I don't believe in coding policies where maintainers need to spot if AI is used or not. I believe in experienced maintainers that are able to tell if a change looks sensible or not.

>>antire+Vg
This doesn't work in the age of AI where producing crappy results is much cheaper than verifying them. While this is the case, metadata will be important to understand if you should even bother verifying the results.

>>b3kart+Ah
The time needed for an AI patch written with the prompt "now make it as small as possible, clean, and human coded" is as big as reviewing the patch itself.