git-ai

Dev tools

git tooling

SHOW HN2026

git-ai

GitHub Browser Plugin for AI Contribution Blame in Pull Requests

blog.rbby.dev

#git blame#ai code attribution#pull request#github plugin

62points
34comments
#1,043of 4,366 in 2026
Top 24%of 2026 by points

How HN took it

MixedNo clear lean

1 positive, 8 neutral or asking, 0 mixed, 8 critical, out of 17 comments about the project. Thread score -0.43.

Idea: 1 for, 8 against

The thread, comment by comment

Each row is a top-level comment and its replies, in HN's order. Select a cell to open that comment on HN.

positive neutral or mixed critical about another commenter or something else the maker

What HN said

What people liked

  • Per-line tracking of AI versus human edits is a useful distinction

    From 1 comment
    • I think the special feature is that it tracks on a per line basis in a blended commit what AI is doing vs. whole commits. not sure the utility of it.
      weaksauce on HN
  • Storing attribution in git notes keeps commit history clean and removable

    From 1 comment
    • It’s not in the git commit history, that’s the cool part! Git-ai stores it in git notes, easy to remove later if you don’t like it ;)
      rbbydotdev on HN

Objections

  • Attribution is noise; the author of the PR should own the code regardless of how it was written

    From 2 comments
    • I'm not sold at the idea - for most projects it makes sense that the author of the PR should ultimately have ownership in the code that they're submitting. It doesn't matter if…
      operator-name on HN
    • Why!? What possible benefit is there to stuffing my git commit history with this noise?
      ottah on HN
  • Could enable harassment or nitpicking of PR authors over AI use

    From 1 comment
    • I doubt anyone is going to really use it for that purpose. What's more likely is people nitpicking or harassing pr authors over any use of AI.
      ottah on HN
  • Reviewing the code itself matters more than knowing its origin

    From 2 comments
    • Why not just look at the code and see if it's good or not?
      nilespotter on HN
    • > Projects like Zig may never allow ai contributions Good luck enforcing that. This extension is solving for the wrong problem and is actually only useful as some kind of…
      Our_Benefactors on HN
  • Separate git author IDs or existing tools could do this without a plugin

    From 1 comment
    • Wouldn't the thing to do to give them their own account id / email so we can use standard git blame tools? Why do we need a plugin or new tools to accomplish this? Don't know why…
      verdverm on HN

Requests

  • Store attribution in the commit trailer or commit object so it is part of history

    From 1 comment
    • It seems like something like this should be added to the commit object/message itself, instead of git notes. Maybe as addition to Co-Authored-By trailer. This would make sure…
      shayief on HN
  • Include the model and prompt that produced the code

    From 2 comments
    • Giving it its own id doesn't store all the useful metadata this tool preserves, like the model and prompt that generated the code
      Anonbrit on HN
    • Because they can produce magnitude more code than you can review. And personally I don't want to review _any_ submitted AI code if I don't have a guarantee that the person who…
      monsieurbanana on HN

Questions

  • Why is this post resubmitted and on the front page?

    From 2 comments
    • Wouldn't the thing to do to give them their own account id / email so we can use standard git blame tools? Why do we need a plugin or new tools to accomplish this? Don't know why…
      verdverm on HN
    • Many posts get resubmitted if someone finds them interesting and, if it's been a few days, they generally get "second-chance" treatment. That means they'll be able to make it to…
      nightpool on HN
  • What are the costs of giving AI its own account seat?

    From 2 comments
    • That would cost a seat, I'm guessing.
      jayd16 on HN
    • how much is this solution like this going to cost you per current seat? On one hand, I would imagine companies like GitHub will not charge for agent accounts because they want to…
      verdverm on HN

Alternatives named

  • aider/cecli records AI attribution in commits

    From 1 comment
  • GitLens has a similar feature

    From 1 comment
    • I believe GitLens has a version of this feature that I tried. To others points, seeing the person who actually committed it was more helpful.
      Alxc1 on HN
  • Separate AI git account or (human)/(agent) name prefixes

    From 2 comments
    • Wouldn't the thing to do to give them their own account id / email so we can use standard git blame tools? Why do we need a plugin or new tools to accomplish this? Don't know why…
      verdverm on HN
    • I'm using '(human)' and '(agent)' prefix as a poor mans alternative
      verdverm on HN

Category, keywords, summaries and labels on this page were made by AI (Thread Reader v2) and not checked by hand. Each point links to the comments it came from.

Add a badge to your READMEShown on HackerShow
[![Shown on HackerShow](https://hackershow.org/badge.svg)](https://hackershow.org/show/46871473)