You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
I wanted to provide an update on a critical issue affecting the open source community: the increasing volume of low-quality contributions that is creating significant operational challenges for maintainers.
Weβve been hearing from you that youβre dedicating substantial time to reviewing contributions that do not meet project quality standards for a number of reasons - they fail to follow project guidelines, are frequently abandoned shortly after submission, and are often AI-generated. As AI continues to reshape software development workflows and the nature of open source collaboration, I want you to know that we are actively investigating this problem and developing both immediate and longer-term strategic solutions.
What we're exploring
Weβve spent time reviewing feedback from community members, working directly with maintainers to explore various solutions, and looking through open source repositories to understand the nature of these contributions. Below is an overview of the solutions weβre currently evaluating.
Short-term solutions:
Repository-level PR controls
Disable PRs entirely - This has been a long-standing request (since 2016) and is a first step in giving maintainers more tools to customize their PR experience. This also addresses use cases where maintainers want to share code without accepting external contributions, such as mirror repositories. A repo-level setting would also eliminate the need for custom automations that various open source projects are building to automatically close external PRs.
Restrict PRs to collaborators - This provides more granular access control, allowing contributions exclusively from existing collaborators while blocking external contributors.
The ability to delete a PR from the UI - This provides maintainers with the ability to remove spam or low-quality PRs directly from the interface to improve repository organization.
Long-term direction:
As AI adoption accelerates, we recognize the need to proactively address how it can potentially transform both contributor and maintainer workflows. We are exploring:
Enhanced permission models - Provide maintainers with more tools so they can customize their PR experience:
More granular controls for determining who can create and reviewing PRs beyond blocking all users or restricting to collaborators only.
Ways for maintainers to define criteria that PRs must meet before they can be opened.
Improved triage tools - Potentially leveraging AI to evaluate contributions against project guidelines and standards to identify which contributions maintainers should focus on reviewing.
Transparency in AI-assisted contributions - Improved visibility and attribution when AI tools are used throughout the PR lifecycle.
Next Steps
These are some starting points, and weβre continuing to explore both immediate improvements and long-term solutions. Please share your feedback, questions, or concerns in this thread. Your input is crucial to making sure weβre building the right things and tackling this challenge effectively. As always, thank you for being part of this conversation. Looking forward to hearing your thoughts and working together to address this problem.
GeneralGeneral topics and discussions that don't fit into other categories, but are related to GitHubMaintainer Love β€οΈTiny wins, big impact
1 participant
Heading
Bold
Italic
Quote
Code
Link
Numbered list
Unordered list
Task list
Attach files
Mention
Reference
Menu
reacted with thumbs up emoji reacted with thumbs down emoji reacted with laugh emoji reacted with hooray emoji reacted with confused emoji reacted with heart emoji reacted with rocket emoji reacted with eyes emoji
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
-
Select Topic Area
General
Body
Hey everyone,
I wanted to provide an update on a critical issue affecting the open source community: the increasing volume of low-quality contributions that is creating significant operational challenges for maintainers.
Weβve been hearing from you that youβre dedicating substantial time to reviewing contributions that do not meet project quality standards for a number of reasons - they fail to follow project guidelines, are frequently abandoned shortly after submission, and are often AI-generated. As AI continues to reshape software development workflows and the nature of open source collaboration, I want you to know that we are actively investigating this problem and developing both immediate and longer-term strategic solutions.
What we're exploring
Weβve spent time reviewing feedback from community members, working directly with maintainers to explore various solutions, and looking through open source repositories to understand the nature of these contributions. Below is an overview of the solutions weβre currently evaluating.
Short-term solutions:
Long-term direction:
As AI adoption accelerates, we recognize the need to proactively address how it can potentially transform both contributor and maintainer workflows. We are exploring:
Next Steps
These are some starting points, and weβre continuing to explore both immediate improvements and long-term solutions. Please share your feedback, questions, or concerns in this thread. Your input is crucial to making sure weβre building the right things and tackling this challenge effectively. As always, thank you for being part of this conversation. Looking forward to hearing your thoughts and working together to address this problem.
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
All reactions