Skip to content

docs: incorporate some AI guidance for contributors #4131

New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

Sign up for GitHub

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Merged
rtyler merged 2 commits into from
Jan 27, 2026
Merged

docs: incorporate some AI guidance for contributors #4131

Changes from all commits
Commits
Show all changes
2 commits
Select commit Hold shift + click to select a range
ec6d582
docs: incorporate some AI guidance for contributors
rtyler Jan 27, 2026
76c489b
Merge branch 'main' into docs/ai-contributions
rtyler Jan 27, 2026
File filter

Filter by extension

Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
38 changes: 38 additions & 0 deletions CONTRIBUTING.md
View file
Open in desktop
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
Expand Up @@ -8,6 +8,44 @@ If you want to start contributing, first look at our good first issues: https://

If you want to contribute something more substantial, see our "Projects seeking contributors" section on our roadmap: https://github.com/delta-io/delta-rs/issues/1128

## AI-generated code

We recognise that AI coding assistants are now a regular part of many
developers' workflows and can improve productivity. Thoughtful use of these
tools can be beneficial, but AI-generated PRs can sometimes lead to
undesirable additional maintainer burden. PRs that appear to be fully
generated by AI with little to no engagement from the author may be closed
without further review.

Human-generated mistakes tend to be easier to spot and reason about, and
code review is intended to be a collaborative learning experience that
benefits both submitter and reviewer. When a PR appears to have been
generated without much engagement from the submitter, reviewers with access
to AI tools could more efficiently generate the code directly, and since
the submitter is not likely to learn from the review process, their time is
more productively spent researching and reporting on the issue.

We are not opposed to the use of AI tools in generating PRs, but recommend
the following:

* Only submit a PR if you are able to debug and own the changes yourself -
review all generated code to understand every detail. [Apache Datafusion has a useful explanation of **why fully AI-generated PRs without understanding are not helpful**](https://datafusion.apache.org/contributor-guide/index.html#why-fully-ai-generated-prs-without-understanding-are-not-helpful).
* Match the style and conventions used in the rest of the codebase, including
PR titles and descriptions
* Be upfront about AI usage and summarise what was AI-generated
* If there are parts you don't fully understand, leave comments on your own PR
explaining what steps you took to verify correctness
* Watch for AI's tendency to generate overly verbose comments, unnecessary
test cases, and incorrect fixes
* Break down large PRs into smaller ones to make review easier

PR authors are also responsible for disclosing any copyrighted materials in
submitted contributions. See the `[Apache Software
Foundation's](https://apache.org) [guidance on AI-generated
code](https://www.apache.org/legal/generative-tooling.html) for further
information on licensing considerations.


## Claiming an issue

If you want to claim an issue to work on, you can write the word `take` as a comment in it and you will be automatically assigned.
Expand Down
Loading