From 4941c314fc8c38ed6df037c29d4809f7a7fd9af9 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Sebastian Thiel Date: Wed, 6 May 2026 14:52:31 +0800 Subject: [PATCH 1/2] Add AI-disclusure and quality requirements to the contribution guidelines. Co-authored-by: GPT 5.5 --- CONTRIBUTING.md | 29 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ 1 file changed, 29 insertions(+) diff --git a/CONTRIBUTING.md b/CONTRIBUTING.md index 8536d7f73..d8a29f55d 100644 --- a/CONTRIBUTING.md +++ b/CONTRIBUTING.md @@ -9,6 +9,35 @@ The following is a short step-by-step rundown of what one typically would do to - Feel free to add yourself to AUTHORS file. - Create a pull request. +## Quality expectations + +Contributions must be made with care and meet the quality bar of the surrounding code. +That means a change should not leave GitPython worse than it was before: it should be +readable, maintainable, tested where practical, documented and consistent with the +existing style and behavior. +A contribution that works only narrowly but lowers the quality of the +codebase may be declined, and the pull request closed without warning. + +## AI-assisted contributions + +If AI edits files for you, disclose it in the pull request description and commit +metadata. Prefer making the agent identity part of the commit, for example by using +an AI author such as `$agent $version ` or a co-author via +a `Co-authored-by: ` trailer. + +Agents operating through a person's GitHub account must identify themselves. For +example, comments posted by an agent should say so directly with phrases like +`AI agent on behalf of : ...`. + +Fully AI-generated comments on pull requests or issues must also be disclosed. +Undisclosed AI-generated comments may lead to the pull request or issue being closed. + +AI-assisted proofreading or wording polish does not need disclosure, but it is still +courteous to mention it when the AI materially influenced the final text. + +Automated or "full-auto" AI contributions without a human responsible for reviewing +and standing behind the work may be closed. + ## Fuzzing Test Specific Documentation For details related to contributing to the fuzzing test suite and OSS-Fuzz integration, please From 92ff6df86b82e94254874b52b05dee9ffe38716b Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Eliah Kagan Date: Wed, 6 May 2026 09:58:33 -0400 Subject: [PATCH 2/2] Separate quality paragraphs and adjust decline wording Split the quality-expectations section into two paragraphs (the warning about low-quality contributions being declined was visually merged with the preceding paragraph). Replace "and the pull request closed without warning" with a note that maintainers may not always be able to provide detailed feedback, which conveys the same practical reality. Co-authored-by: Claude Opus 4.6 --- CONTRIBUTING.md | 4 +++- 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/CONTRIBUTING.md b/CONTRIBUTING.md index d8a29f55d..60e34a651 100644 --- a/CONTRIBUTING.md +++ b/CONTRIBUTING.md @@ -15,8 +15,10 @@ Contributions must be made with care and meet the quality bar of the surrounding That means a change should not leave GitPython worse than it was before: it should be readable, maintainable, tested where practical, documented and consistent with the existing style and behavior. + A contribution that works only narrowly but lowers the quality of the -codebase may be declined, and the pull request closed without warning. +codebase may be declined. The maintainers may not always be able to provide +detailed feedback. ## AI-assisted contributions