Define commit standards: authorship, AI attribution, and trailers
@Ethan-Arrowood ci sta già lavorando.
Dal 10/7/2026.
Valutazione
Questa issue non è ancora stata valutata.
Descrizione
Summary
Write a commit standards guideline doc. Initial scope is authorship and attribution — who a commit is credited to and how AI involvement is disclosed — plus an exploration of commit trailers and eventual enforcement. Keep everything in this one issue for now; enforcement work can be split into sub-tasks later once we've settled the guidelines themselves.
Doc outline
1. Authorship and AI attribution
- Every commit must have a human primary author. The
Authorfield is always a person, never an AI agent or bot identity. - AI-generated or AI-assisted commits should attribute the agent via a trailer —
Co-Authored-By:is the current convention (e.g. what Claude Code appends), but the doc should confirm that's the trailer we want, or propose a better-suited one if the ecosystem has converged elsewhere. - Define where the line is: does tab-completion count? Does an agent writing the whole diff? The doc should give practical guidance so people aren't guessing.
2. Trailers: Signed-off-by and the DCO
Explore whether we should adopt Signed-off-by (as used by the Node.js project and the broader Linux/DCO ecosystem):
- What it actually asserts (Developer Certificate of Origin) vs. what commit signing asserts — they solve different problems and the doc should make that distinction clear
- Whether it makes sense org-wide, only for public OSS repos accepting external contributions, or not at all
- If adopted anywhere, when it's most appropriate (e.g. repos with outside contributors where provenance/licensing assertions matter)
- Recommendation with rationale — it's fine for the answer to be "not now, revisit when X"
3. AI agent workflows
These standards should be embedded in agent workflows, not just written down for humans — agents both author commits and review PRs, and skill-level guidance gives us soft enforcement before any tooling exists:
- Producing commits: skills / agent instructions (
skillsrepo,CLAUDE.md/AGENTS.mdconventions) should encode the authorship rules directly — human as primary author, agent attributed via the agreed trailer, plus any trailer conventions we adopt (e.g.Signed-off-bywhere applicable). Agents following the standard by construction is cheaper than catching violations after the fact. - Reviewing PRs: PR-review skills should include a commit-hygiene check — verify authorship/attribution trailers are present and correctly formatted, and flag violations in review output. This is our interim enforcement layer until (and even after) automated linting exists.
The doc should describe this pattern; updating individual skills to implement it can be follow-up work alongside the enforcement sub-tasks below.
4. Enforcement (exploratory — likely future sub-tasks)
We do very little commit linting/enforcement today. The doc should explore options without committing us to rolling them out everywhere:
- Commit message linting (e.g. commitlint, gitlint) — what we'd check (trailers present, author format) and where it would run (CI, merge queue)
- GitHub-side options: rulesets with metadata patterns, required workflows
- DCO enforcement apps/actions if we adopt
Signed-off-by - Explicit note that guidelines can be adopted before enforcement exists — deciding the standard and enforcing it org-wide are separate efforts, and enforcement is a heavier lift we can stage later. Skill-embedded guidance (§3) is the lightweight interim layer.
Acceptance criteria
- Doc added to this repo covering authorship, AI attribution, and the trailer exploration
- Clear recommendation on
Signed-off-by/DCO adoption (including "not yet" as a valid outcome) - AI agent workflow guidance included (agents follow the standard when committing; review skills check commit hygiene)
- Enforcement options surveyed, with candidate follow-up sub-tasks identified but not yet filed
Related
- #12 (commit signing) — signing verifies who pushed the bits; this doc covers how commits are attributed and formatted. The two docs should cross-link.
- Lingua principale
- JavaScript
- Stelle
- 3
- Fork
- 0
- Metriche di merge delle PR
- Nessuna PR unita negli ultimi 30g
Preparare l'ambiente
Come iniziare
- Leggi tutta la issue e poi la guida ai contributi del progetto.
- Commenta sulla issue per dire che te ne occupi tu — evita che due persone facciano lo stesso lavoro.
- Fai un fork del repository e lavora su un branch.
- Apri una pull request che faccia riferimento al numero della issue.
Altre issue di HarperFast/code-guidelines
-
Document commit signing: rationale, setup, and org-wide enforcementForse di nuovo libera @Ethan-Arrowood l’ha presa 79 giorni fa e non c’è nessuna pull request aperta. Aperta
HarperFast/code-guidelines#12 · 1 assegnatario ·
Tutte le issue di HarperFast/code-guidelines
Issue simili
-
Difficoltà 2/5 1-3 ore Idoneità per principianti 75/100
I maintainer di solito rispondono entro 1 giorno
-
Difficoltà 2/5 1-3 ore Idoneità per principianti 86/100
I maintainer di solito rispondono entro 1 giorno
-
curriculum documentation quality
Difficoltà 2/5 1-3 ore Idoneità per principianti 78/100
githubnext/gh-aw-workshop#3897 ·
I maintainer di solito rispondono entro 2 giorni
-
Difficoltà 2/5 1-3 ore Idoneità per principianti 84/100
I maintainer di solito rispondono entro 1 giorno
-
agent/quality hive/hosted-available-lke648397-260827-5n31 quality testing
Difficoltà 2/5 1-3 ore Idoneità per principianti 91/100
I maintainer di solito rispondono entro 1 giorno