Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Claude Session URL appended to commit messages and PR descriptions by default

github.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

171–180 of 257 posts

Re: Claude Session URL appended to commit messages and PR descriptions by default

#171

Post by verdverm »

otterley wrote: post #110
DarmokTanagra wrote: post #89

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Like "code generator IDE plugins". There are hundreds of them for just about every IDE you can think of. I can't tell if this is a serious question or not, but metaprogramming/generators are decades old concepts that have been common features of basically every IDE since the 90s.

That’s not what we’re talking about, though. That’s mechanical transformation, and isn’t the same thing as code that’s generated on demand from scratch, based on plain-language intent. Surely you know the difference, right? I assume you’ve used LLMs to generate code by now?

It's still code generation, a compiler also generates code, why do you sound like you are arguing LLMs are the only path to generating code now?

Re: Claude Session URL appended to commit messages and PR descriptions by default

#172

Post by verdverm »

jesse_dot_id wrote: post #159

I consider my prompts and prompting style to be trade secrets. I've developed a very efficient and productive workflow for myself over the years without tutorials, without books, etc. Anthropic is making very strange and very opinionated decisions far too often for my liking. It's really making me second guess my continued use of Claude Code.

There are many options, big fan of open weight models, I only use them now, they have gotten very good

Fireworks, OpenCode Go, local hardware are my avenues

Re: Claude Session URL appended to commit messages and PR descriptions by default

#173

Post by verdverm »

smeej wrote: post #166
calmworm wrote: post #162

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Do you imagine China may one day claim they own all the rights to all the objects labeled with “Made in China” on them? Could Anthropic possibly do this?

I would say the answer is "obviously not," to the degree that it's hard totake your question in good faith. The China-made goods have been sold. Ownership transfers at sale. It would be ludicrous for some Chinese agency to say, "Well, we made it, so even though you bought it from us, it's actually still ours. Surprise!"

The difference is that US SaaS has the pattern of not seeing sales as ownership transfer, they are in the rental model and cut off access if you stop paying

Re: Claude Session URL appended to commit messages and PR descriptions by default

#174

Post by ndriscoll »

jpc0 wrote: post #113
oniony wrote: post #90

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My spade is a meaningful part of digging a hole when I plant a tree, but I still don't want a "Spear and Jackson" sign on my tree when I'm done.

There has been more than I project where I literally didn’t even look at the code. I prompted what amounts to verbose “I want X” and then did QA. I’m perfectly happy with an LLM being credited with that code and there being no copyright existing for that code. For some people that is their life’s work and they want to clutch pearls. Their sole contribution was a half baked idea and they shipped QA out to their “users…

This is a problem with copyright in general. There's no longer any requirement to provide information about copyright status, so there's no way for the public to know whether something is copyrighted (no doubt the uncertainty is intentional as an additional way to undermine the public domain). This is just as true for expired copyrights, or material placed in the public domain intentionally.

The solution isn't to add notices to non-copyrighted things; it's to require notice for copyrighted things, including date.

Individually, of course, one should simply assume things are not copyrighted if you have no way to know, and do whatever you want. If the author can't be bothered to tell you, you have no moral responsibility to care.

Re: Claude Session URL appended to commit messages and PR descriptions by default

#176

Post by verdverm »

russfink wrote: post #5

Instead of accepting the default “commit then push,” try “draft a commit message and let me review and revise it first.”

one can go as far as preventing pushes altogether, or don't give them write permissions to your repos

Re: Claude Session URL appended to commit messages and PR descriptions by default

#177

Post by verdverm »

ketzu wrote: post #25

I like claude code, I use it quite a bit for things, and I don't mind the attribution (I do not plan to deceive people of me using AI or not for a change) and I think a link back to the session is valueable after the fact. At least for me, the session contains a lot of discussion, back and forth, changes from me and more. (Also, if the feature is not on by default, it probably might not exist.) However, I think claud…

> However, I think claude code needs better change management.

Ant is a slop factory and proud about it, you only have to listen to their people talk. Their products are buggy and inconsistent in features, so I don't use them.

Re: Claude Session URL appended to commit messages and PR descriptions by default

#178

Post by verdverm »

greenowl wrote: post #12

Beyond "branding", I don't mind this general direction. There absolutely should be a fool proof undefeatable mechanism that identifies or watermarks code that was completely LLM generated. If you use LLMs, own it.

you own the code, not the use of an LLM

Re: Claude Session URL appended to commit messages and PR descriptions by default

#179

Post by jamietanna »

panny wrote: post #8

Anthropic is right here. You need to clearly define what commits are AI authored or you are conspiring to commit copyfraud. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Copyfraud AI does not enjoy copyright protection. Pretending you created something written by AI is copyfraud.

Very much agree, and per https://www.jvt.me/posts/2026/02/25/llm-attribute/ there are a number of other benefits to attributing correctly - you know what parts of the code may be "tainted" by AI-generated code, and allow yourself to clarify to the reader what parts are AI and what are not
Post reply on HN