Also just got an email invite, guess they are going out in waves. FYI, pip has been working on a more explicit AI policy, I doubt it will be appropriate for an Apache project, but some awareness and context on what other OSS projects are working on: https://github.com/pypa/pip/pull/13826
Damian -----Original Message----- From: Jarek Potiuk <[email protected]> Sent: Tuesday, March 3, 2026 4:52 PM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] Active approach to fighting with AI slop (while keeping maintainers in the driving seat) > FWIW I don't know any open source maintainer who got a response from Anthropic after signing up, I tried and also signed up to their security tool which they say is free and expedited for open source maintainers have got no response: https://www.anthropic.com/news/claude-code-security. Perhaps this is just an email farming exercise from Anthropic? I just got added to the programme and they even returned back the remaining money from this month subscription on my credit card .. J. On Mon, Mar 2, 2026 at 5:52 PM Jarek Potiuk <[email protected]> wrote: > > FWIW I don't know any open source maintainer who got a response from > Anthropic after signing up, I tried and also signed up to their > security tool which they say is free and expedited for open source > maintainers have got no response: > https://www.anthropic.com/news/claude-code-security. > Perhaps this is just an email farming exercise from Anthropic? > > I truly hope they are simply overwhelmed and their, ehm, agents, > struggle to just process the requests :) > > On Mon, Mar 2, 2026 at 4:49 PM Damian Shaw > <[email protected]> > wrote: > >> > And since we have at the very least 6 months of free Claude Code >> > Max >> for maintainers of big OSS projects >> https://claude.com/contact-sales/claude-for-oss as of 3 days >> (liteally day after I paid for my first month)!!!) - Airflow >> definitely qualifies, so all core maintainers can get it regardless >> if their employees already pay them for it. So if you have not done it yet >> - apply :D. >> >> FWIW I don't know any open source maintainer who got a response from >> Anthropic after signing up, I tried and also signed up to their >> security tool which they say is free and expedited for open source >> maintainers have got no response: >> https://www.anthropic.com/news/claude-code-security. >> Perhaps this is just an email farming exercise from Anthropic? >> >> Damian >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Jarek Potiuk <[email protected]> >> Sent: Monday, March 2, 2026 5:21 AM >> To: [email protected] >> Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] Active approach to fighting with AI slop >> (while keeping maintainers in the driving seat) >> >> Yeah. But with this rate of development with Claude - we will have it >> all done before they even start :D. I literally Claude-Coded the >> entire thing yesterday afternoon. >> >> On Mon, Mar 2, 2026 at 10:55 AM Aritra Basu >> <[email protected]> >> wrote: >> >> > Jarek what's your opinion on taking up some of these improvements >> > as part of Gsoc? I think it's separated from airflow enough that it >> > won't overwhelm new entrants, also can make a relatively large >> > project out of it if planned well? >> > -- >> > Regards, >> > Aritra Basu >> > >> > On Mon, 2 Mar 2026, 3:12 pm Jarek Potiuk, <[email protected]> wrote: >> > >> > > > Basically, try to keep the content in these files to an >> > > > absolute >> > minimum >> > > focusing on information that cannot be inferred/discovered, >> > > one-line code patterns, disallowed behaviours, links to guides. >> > > >> > > Absolutely. And as usual.. PRs are welcome :) >> > > >> > > On Mon, Mar 2, 2026 at 10:40 AM Nathan Hadfield < >> > [email protected]> >> > > wrote: >> > > >> > > > Hello, >> > > > >> > > > On the topic of CLAUDE/AGENTS.md files, there was a rather >> > > > interesting paper published recently about their effectiveness. >> > > > >> > > > https://arxiv.org/abs/2602.11988 >> > > > >> > > > The TD;LR is >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > * >> > > > LLM-generated context files reduce success rates (0.5-2%) while >> > > increasing >> > > > inference cost by 20-23% >> > > > * >> > > > Developer-written files help slightly (+4%), but verbose >> > > > content that duplicates existing docs is pure cost >> > > > * >> > > > Codebase overviews don't improve navigation: agents find >> > > > relevant files >> > > in >> > > > the same number of steps regardless >> > > > >> > > > Basically, try to keep the content in these files to an >> > > > absolute >> > minimum >> > > > focusing on information that cannot be inferred/discovered, >> > > > one-line >> > code >> > > > patterns, disallowed behaviours, links to guides. >> > > > >> > > > Hope this helps. >> > > > >> > > > Cheers, >> > > > >> > > > Nathan >> > > > >> > > > From: Jarek Potiuk <[email protected]> >> > > > Date: Monday, 2 March 2026 at 09:29 >> > > > To: [email protected] <[email protected]> >> > > > Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] Active approach to fighting with AI slop >> > > > (while keeping maintainers in the driving seat) >> > > > >> > > > This Message Is From an External Sender This message came from >> > > > outside your organization. >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > Also: I am thinking of more tools like that - especially one >> > > > that will allow us to auto-triage issues and use an LLM to >> > > > speed up issue classification for provider releases (once >> > > > suggested by Shahar I think) >> > > and >> > > > many more things. >> > > > >> > > > The quality of good models is amazing. I am literally stunned >> > > > by what Claude Code can do today - I tried it few months ago >> > > > and the difference >> > > is >> > > > night and day. I literally entirely Claude-Coded the whole >> > > > thing without writing a single line of code myself. >> > > > >> > > > And since we have at the very least 6 months of free Claude >> > > > Code Max >> > for >> > > > maintainers of big OSS projects >> > > > >> > > > >> > > >> > https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://claude.com/contact-sales/claude >> > -fo >> > r-oss__;!!Ci6f514n9QsL8ck!mS8qTovb9go2kfJwcUGGry6yWpOOcdvB2IXJYYHcO >> > Eam -B2gTQQ_dcYm19lzIlgAKCiUragw0XqPXOJZ$ >> > > > as of 3 days (liteally day >> > > > after I paid for my first month)!!!) - Airflow definitely >> > > > qualifies, so >> > > all >> > > > core maintainers can get it regardless if their employees >> > > > already pay >> > > them >> > > > for it. So if you have not done it yet - apply :D. >> > > > >> > > > J. >> > > > >> > > > On Mon, Mar 2, 2026 at 10:22 AM Jarek Potiuk <[email protected]> >> wrote: >> > > > >> > > > > > maybe we should use the new LLMOperator form common.ai as >> > > > > > an >> > option >> > > > > (hehe)! >> > > > > Just joking, of course. >> > > > > >> > > > > Crossed my mind :D >> > > > > >> > > > > On Mon, Mar 2, 2026 at 10:20 AM Pavankumar Gopidesu < >> > > > > [email protected]> wrote: >> > > > > >> > > > >> This is really cool, Jarek. Thanks for sharing. A tool like >> > > > >> this is definitely necessary given the current volume of AI >> > > > >> slope and PRs >> > > being >> > > > >> submitted without proper context. >> > > > >> >> > > > >> maybe we should use the new LLMOperator form common.ai as an >> > > > >> option (hehe)! >> > > > >> Just joking, of course. >> > > > >> >> > > > >> Regards, >> > > > >> Pavan >> > > > >> >> > > > >> On Mon, Mar 2, 2026 at 9:17 AM Jarek Potiuk >> > > > >> <[email protected]> >> > wrote: >> > > > >> >> > > > >> > > I think that we could later automate at least the >> > > > >> > > dry-run >> > > execution >> > > > of >> > > > >> > the >> > > > >> > script, along with Slack notification for highly-suspected >> > > issues/PRs. >> > > > >> > Then, it would be easier for maintainers to react fast >> > > > >> > when >> > needed. >> > > > >> > >> > > > >> > Yes. I would like to run it manually—ideally with several >> > volunteer >> > > > >> > maintainers - for a while to see how it works, improve and >> > > > >> > iterate >> > > and >> > > > >> > possibly add more quality gates. When we have more >> > > > >> > confidence we >> > > could >> > > > >> run >> > > > >> > it automatically for some parts or even the whole process >> > eventually >> > > > >> > (especially for high-confidence/sensitive stuff), keeping >> > > > >> > the >> > > > sensitive >> > > > >> > parts with Human-In-The-Loop. >> > > > >> > >> > > > >> > But also (and this is my hope) - similarly to `breeze ci >> > > > >> > upgrade` >> > it >> > > > >> might >> > > > >> > turn out that the process is so efficient and "nice" to >> > > > >> > follow >> > that >> > > we >> > > > >> > could continue trigger it manually, regularly, perhaps >> > > > >> > with a >> > > > rotational >> > > > >> > maintainer handling the triage. I think comments and >> > > > >> > actions >> > coming >> > > > >> from a >> > > > >> > human maintainer have more value than those from a >> > > > >> > bot—even if the >> > > > human >> > > > >> > action is merely confirming what an automated system or >> > > > >> > LLM >> > > proposed. >> > > > >> > >> > > > >> > J. >> > > > >> > >> > > > >> > >> > > > >> > On Mon, Mar 2, 2026 at 10:04 AM Shahar Epstein >> > > > >> > <[email protected] >> > > >> > > > >> wrote: >> > > > >> > >> > > > >> > > Amazing stuff Jarek! >> > > > >> > > I think that we could later automate at least the >> > > > >> > > dry-run >> > > execution >> > > > of >> > > > >> > the >> > > > >> > > script, along with Slack notification for >> > > > >> > > highly-suspected >> > > > issues/PRs. >> > > > >> > > Then, it would be easier for maintainers to react fast >> > > > >> > > when >> > > needed. >> > > > >> > > >> > > > >> > > Looking forward for new AI-based features in breeze in >> > particular, >> > > > and >> > > > >> > > Airflow in general :) >> > > > >> > > >> > > > >> > > >> > > > >> > > Shahar >> > > > >> > > >> > > > >> > > >> > > > >> > > On Sat, Feb 28, 2026, 04:59 Jarek Potiuk >> > > > >> > > <[email protected]> >> > > wrote: >> > > > >> > > >> > > > >> > > > Hello everyone, >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > While preparing for consensus on the assignment >> > > > >> > > > policy, I >> > > created >> > > > PR >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > >> > https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://github.com/apache/airflow/pull/ >> > 625 >> > 85__;!!Ci6f514n9QsL8ck!mS8qTovb9go2kfJwcUGGry6yWpOOcdvB2IXJYYHcOEam >> > -B2 >> > gTQQ_dcYm19lzIlgAKCiUragw0bHQEs-s$ >> > > . >> > > > This PR adds a new >> > > > >> > command >> > > > >> > > > to >> > > > >> > > > Breeze, `breeze issues unassign`, which unassigns >> > > > >> > > > anyone who >> > is >> > > > not >> > > > >> a >> > > > >> > > > committer or collaborator. >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > I want this to be the first of several Breeze commands >> > > > >> > > > I plan >> > to >> > > > >> add to >> > > > >> > > > help manage the AI overhead and burden on maintainers. >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > I got inspired bu Hugo van Kamerade's (my friend, >> > > > >> > > > Python >> > release >> > > > >> > manager) >> > > > >> > > > tool >> > > > >> > > >> > https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://hugovk.dev/blog/2026/gh-triage/ >> > __; >> > !!Ci6f514n9QsL8ck!mS8qTovb9go2kfJwcUGGry6yWpOOcdvB2IXJYYHcOEam-B2gT >> > QQ_ >> > dcYm19lzIlgAKCiUragw0TLnNyxs$ >> > > . >> > > > He added the `gh` >> > > > >> > plugin >> > > > >> > > > that helps him manage spam coming to Python. I hope we >> > > > >> > > > can >> > have >> > > > very >> > > > >> > > > similar set of commands and regular process of >> > > > >> > > > performing >> > > cleanup >> > > > >> with >> > > > >> > > the >> > > > >> > > > issues/prs we are getting. >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > BTW. I am using Claude Code to add those commands (so >> > > > >> > > > this is >> > a >> > > > bit >> > > > >> > like >> > > > >> > > > using AI to fight AI slop). But in a smart way. >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > In our case we have `breeze` that we are already using >> > > > >> > > > for `ci >> > > > >> upgrade` >> > > > >> > > by >> > > > >> > > > maintainers and I see no reason why we could not use >> > > > >> > > > our own >> > CLI >> > > > to >> > > > >> > make >> > > > >> > > us >> > > > >> > > > far more efficient with assessing and quickly and >> > > > >> > > > efficiently >> > > > >> > processing >> > > > >> > > > incoming spam. >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > Starting with AGENTS.md that describes what we expect >> > > > >> > > > (and >> > > > instructs >> > > > >> > > agents >> > > > >> > > > to make good PRs) and changing our assignment process >> > > > >> > > > - I >> > think >> > > we >> > > > >> > should >> > > > >> > > > proceed to implement step-by-step handling of the >> > > > >> > > > incoming >> > > > traffic: >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > a) Quickly assess how well PRs implement our >> > > > >> > > > expectations, >> > point >> > > > out >> > > > >> > > > problems, and close them >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > b) automatically telling the collaborators what is >> > > > >> > > > wrong with >> > > > their >> > > > >> PRs >> > > > >> > > if >> > > > >> > > > they are incomplete (for example when tests are >> > > > >> > > > failing, or >> > when >> > > > >> they >> > > > >> > > need >> > > > >> > > > a rebase) >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > c) automatically responding to issues that they are >> > > > >> > > > incomplete >> > > and >> > > > >> need >> > > > >> > > > more information >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > d) Allow filtering by area (so that maintainers >> > > > >> > > > focusing on a >> > > > >> > particular >> > > > >> > > > area can periodically review only the areas they are >> > > > >> > > > intereste >> > > > >> > > > e) all that with some AI assistance (I plan to >> > > > >> > > > imlpement >> > > > integration >> > > > >> > with >> > > > >> > > > some modern AI LLMs so that it is seamless for those >> > maintainers >> > > > who >> > > > >> > > > already use some of those (including Cloud Code, GH >> > > > >> > > > Copilot >> > > > >> > (maintainers >> > > > >> > > > can apply for free access there), Codex and any models >> > > > >> > > > someone >> > > > >> prefers >> > > > >> > - >> > > > >> > > > including local models). >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > f) all that with maintainer in the driver's seat—we >> > > > >> > > > won't do >> > > those >> > > > >> > things >> > > > >> > > > fully automatically - but we will get reviewable >> > > > >> > > > action >> > proposal >> > > > in >> > > > >> > bulk >> > > > >> > > > that the maintainer will be able to accept, modify or >> reject. >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > .... more... >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > All that will be open to contribution and I will be >> > > > >> > > > happy to >> > > > leading >> > > > >> > > > introduction and disseminating those CLI options >> > > > >> > > > between >> > > > >> maintainers to >> > > > >> > > > make sure those get incorporated in our daily work - >> > > > >> > > > relieving >> > > > some >> > > > >> of >> > > > >> > > the >> > > > >> > > > burden we are all experiencing and sharing it between >> people. >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > I think this is a viable approach to address our >> > > > >> > > > current >> > burden >> > > > >> > > > proactively, rather than waiting for others to act. >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > This is also somewhat experimental since we haven't >> > > > >> > > > seen it >> > done >> > > > >> > before, >> > > > >> > > so >> > > > >> > > > suggestions, comments, ideas and PRs that could help >> > > > >> > > > us become >> > > > more >> > > > >> > > > efficient and better maintainers are most welcome. >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > Let me know what you think. >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > J. >> > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > >> > > > >> > >> > > > >> >> > > > > >> > > > >> > > > >> > > >> > >> ________________________________ >> Strike Technologies, LLC (“Strike”) is part of the GTS family of >> companies. Strike is a technology solutions provider, and is not a >> broker or dealer and does not transact any securities related >> business directly whatsoever. This communication is the property of >> Strike and its affiliates, and does not constitute an offer to sell >> or the solicitation of an offer to buy any security in any >> jurisdiction. It is intended only for the person to whom it is >> addressed and may contain information that is privileged, confidential, or >> otherwise protected from disclosure. >> Distribution or copying of this communication, or the information >> contained herein, by anyone other than the intended recipient is >> prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please >> immediately notify Strike at [email protected], and delete and >> destroy any copies hereof. >> ________________________________ >> >> CONFIDENTIALITY / PRIVILEGE NOTICE: This transmission and any >> attachments are intended solely for the addressee. This transmission >> is covered by the Electronic Communications Privacy Act, 18 U.S.C >> ''2510-2521. The information contained in this transmission is >> confidential in nature and protected from further use or disclosure >> under U.S. Pub. L. 106-102, 113 U.S. Stat. 1338 (1999), and may be >> subject to attorney-client or other legal privilege. Your use or >> disclosure of this information for any purpose other than that >> intended by its transmittal is strictly prohibited, and may subject >> you to fines and/or penalties under federal and state law. If you are >> not the intended recipient of this transmission, please DESTROY ALL >> COPIES RECEIVED and confirm destruction to the sender via return transmittal. >> > ________________________________ Strike Technologies, LLC (“Strike”) is part of the GTS family of companies. Strike is a technology solutions provider, and is not a broker or dealer and does not transact any securities related business directly whatsoever. This communication is the property of Strike and its affiliates, and does not constitute an offer to sell or the solicitation of an offer to buy any security in any jurisdiction. It is intended only for the person to whom it is addressed and may contain information that is privileged, confidential, or otherwise protected from disclosure. Distribution or copying of this communication, or the information contained herein, by anyone other than the intended recipient is prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please immediately notify Strike at [email protected], and delete and destroy any copies hereof. ________________________________ CONFIDENTIALITY / PRIVILEGE NOTICE: This transmission and any attachments are intended solely for the addressee. This transmission is covered by the Electronic Communications Privacy Act, 18 U.S.C ''2510-2521. The information contained in this transmission is confidential in nature and protected from further use or disclosure under U.S. Pub. L. 106-102, 113 U.S. Stat. 1338 (1999), and may be subject to attorney-client or other legal privilege. Your use or disclosure of this information for any purpose other than that intended by its transmittal is strictly prohibited, and may subject you to fines and/or penalties under federal and state law. If you are not the intended recipient of this transmission, please DESTROY ALL COPIES RECEIVED and confirm destruction to the sender via return transmittal.
