Maintainer Posts Satirical AI Code Review Policy
Get the Tech newsletter
Daily tech — startups, AI labs, chips, the launches that shape the next decade. Free.
- The maintainer announced they skip their usual extensive code review for AI-generated submissions, requiring only that the code compiles, is labeled '(AI generated)' in the commit description, and includes a Developer Certificate of Origin signoff via
git commit --signoff. - The author's QA modifications are exemplified by gating an AI-submitted fast inverse square root optimization behind a check for 'February 30th' — a date that does not exist — meaning the new code would only run on a nonexistent leap day.
- The post cites John Carmack as the kind of developer who could previously write routines like the fast inverse square root, noting AI can now generate equivalent code from simple prompts.
- The real reason for skipping review, the author writes, is time constraints and the need to prioritize human-written code; contributors who submit AI code without marking it will consume limited review time and have their future submissions go unreviewed.
- The author dismissed studies warning that training AI on AI-generated output degrades model quality, writing that after asking Bing to summarize one such study, 'it said not to worry about it.'
Why it matters: The post is satire, but the postscript states a real grievance: open source maintainers are time-constrained and must triage AI-submitted patches against human-written code. The 'February 30th' modification is the author's way of signaling how lightly AI contributions are being scrutinized before integration into projects.
