Search papers, labs, and topics across Lattice.
This study analyzes 13,360 AI conversation sessions from 1,356 open-source software (OSS) repositories to understand how developers interact with AI coding assistants and the subsequent impact on OSS development. The findings reveal that heavier AI usage correlates with increased contributor activity and a decrease in contributor concentration, while communication remains concentrated among a few individuals. Despite concerns about maintainability of AI-generated code, developers generally perceive AI as a facilitator for OSS contributions, indicating a shift in collaborative dynamics within the open-source community.
AI coding assistants are reshaping open-source development by increasing contributor activity while simultaneously raising concerns about code maintainability.
AI coding assistants such as GitHub Copilot and Cursor have evolved from code-suggestion tools into conversational collaborators, enabling vibe-coding workflows in which developers guide AI-generated code through natural-language dialogue. Although researchers have increasingly recognized the importance of AI coding agents and begun examining their impact on open-source development, a comprehensive understanding of how developers' chat-based interactions with AI relate to subsequent open-source development and collaboration remains limited. This hinders efforts to effectively design, evaluate, and govern AI-assisted open-source software development. To address this gap, we collected 13,360 AI conversation sessions comprising 79,172 user messages from 1,356 OSS repositories, linked them to repository development histories, and complemented this analysis with a targeted developer survey. We find heavier AI use in smaller, less mature, and less collaborative repositories. After AI adoption, projects tended to show more active contributors and lower contributor concentration (p < .001), although communication remained highly concentrated. Code Writing was the dominant chat purpose, and nearly all AI chat sessions were followed by subsequent commits. We find no broad deterioration in code-quality signals or pull request merging rates. However, developers perceive others' AI-generated code as harder to maintain than their own (p = .029) and view AI as lowering barriers to OSS contribution. While most developers (68%) are willing to share their chat, concerns remain around appearing incompetent, increasing reviewer burden, and exposing ideas to competitors. These findings provide a large-scale empirical characterization of AI-assisted OSS contribution and offer practical insights for designing and governing responsible vibe-coding practices in open-source development.
