Comment by agentcoops

It's a really difficult problem. I read a comment on here the other day about the increased burden on project maintainers that I sympathized with, but I wonder if the solution isn't actually just more emphasis on reputation tools for individual committers. It seems like the metric shouldn't just be "uses AI assistance" vs "doesn't", which as you note just leads to people hiding their workflow, but something more tied to "average quality of PR." I worked in finance briefly and was always really intrigued by the way responsibility worked for the bankers themselves: they could use any tools they wanted to produce results, but it had to be transparent and if someone was wrong the pretty strict burden fell on that IC personally.

The worst case for AI and OSS is a flood of vibe-coded PRs that increase bugs/burden on project maintainers; the best case is that talented but time-starved engineers are more likely to send the occasional high-quality PR as the time investment per PR decreases.