3 ms·

I agree about the aspect about shirking responsibility, but... >A few years ago I’d never have added Google or StackOverflow as co-authors. That's not as good

by gruez 1mo ago

I agree about the aspect about shirking responsibility, but... >A few years ago I’d never have added Google or StackOverflow as co-authors. That's not as good of an argument as you think. If you copied entire functions or files wholesale, it would be fair to attribute that, even if you "reviewed" it.

bdangubic 1mo ago
we once fired a guy for not including link/attrbution to copy/paste SO function
wyum 1mo ago
Attribution as a "source" I would agree, and I used to put stack overflow links in my docstrings/comments for reference. But I would not ever call the StackOverflow user a "co-author" on my commits. I think that distinction matters.
dhanush 1mo ago
Hi, author here. Yes, I agree and that's precisely what I wrote in the post: > A few years ago I’d never have added Google or StackOverflow as co-authors. But I would have added a link to post that helped and I’ll continue to do so now.
- gruez 1mo ago
  Right, but how would that work with claude? Do you just add "written by claude" in the commit message? Add "written by claude" in the file header (like a copyright notice)? If you're doing either, is there really any difference between that and the standard "co-authored-by: claude" trailer? Is the whole debate over what "co-authored" means and/or how it shows up on github?
  - dhanush 1mo ago
    Yeah, my thought here is more towards what co-authored should mean and what ownership it implies. I think presence of an AGENTS.md / CLAUDE.md is a good signal that I'm using this tool for this project and maybe don't need to repeat it for every commit that I make. My personal feeling so far is, seeing claude code as co-author in my commits inevitably makes me not pay as much attention to the commit. And removing that forces me to really recognize that, hey this is my work. And I'd better make sure this is of the same quality that I would do otherwise. Kind of like a psychological hack maybe? But it seems to work better. Overall, this is just a series of steps I'm taking to maintain my agency in my work.
- hervem 1mo ago
  Never saw this in my experience even not sure it is legal in a license way. Why not following the typical comment with the source URL and author's mention + adding license / header in the third-parties file/folder?

by gruez 1mo ago

bdangubic 1mo ago

we once fired a guy for not including link/attrbution to copy/paste SO function

wyum 1mo ago

Attribution as a "source" I would agree, and I used to put stack overflow links in my docstrings/comments for reference. But I would not ever call the StackOverflow user a "co-author" on my commits. I think that distinction matters.

dhanush 1mo ago

Hi, author here. Yes, I agree and that's precisely what I wrote in the post: > A few years ago I’d never have added Google or StackOverflow as co-authors. But I would have added a link to post that helped and I’ll continue to do so now.

gruez 1mo ago
Right, but how would that work with claude? Do you just add "written by claude" in the commit message? Add "written by claude" in the file header (like a copyright notice)? If you're doing either, is there really any difference between that and the standard "co-authored-by: claude" trailer? Is the whole debate over what "co-authored" means and/or how it shows up on github?
- dhanush 1mo ago
  Yeah, my thought here is more towards what co-authored should mean and what ownership it implies. I think presence of an AGENTS.md / CLAUDE.md is a good signal that I'm using this tool for this project and maybe don't need to repeat it for every commit that I make. My personal feeling so far is, seeing claude code as co-author in my commits inevitably makes me not pay as much attention to the commit. And removing that forces me to really recognize that, hey this is my work. And I'd better make sure this is of the same quality that I would do otherwise. Kind of like a psychological hack maybe? But it seems to work better. Overall, this is just a series of steps I'm taking to maintain my agency in my work.
hervem 1mo ago
Never saw this in my experience even not sure it is legal in a license way. Why not following the typical comment with the source URL and author's mention + adding license / header in the third-parties file/folder?