Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Open source gives recipients rights to use, study, modify, and redistribute software, but language-model agents distribute behavior across code, learned parameters, prompts, tools, retrieval, configuration, and runtime state. These mechanisms complicate maintenance in open and proprietary systems alike. Public delivery adds a distinct question: whether recipients obtain enough rights, materials, checks, and modification entry points to exercise maintenance capability and pass it onward. We call this objective handoffable maintenance: a verified maintenance result produced by one recipient becomes a practical starting point from which a subsequent recipient can complete a predefined bounded change. This survey-informed vision separates release-side readiness from demonstrated handoff and organizes prior work through eight maintenance-operation families, artifact roles, preservation relations, evidence, and recipient conditions. It identifies four research pathways: independently usable modification sources; public repair resources derived from restricted failures; propagation of public repairs through customized forks; and recipient-side replacement of propagated unreliable contributions. Each pathway specifies its deliverable, preservation requirements, strong comparisons, and falsifiable prediction. A shared evaluation design distinguishes a full-support reference, independent reception, and onward handoff, with matched information and task-bounded success criteria. Two public industrial change records illustrate how documentary evidence can motivate checkable requirements; this paper reports no agent, CAD, CFD, participant, or cross-recipient execution. Its contribution is a technical synthesis and research agenda for testing when open rights become maintenance outcomes that another recipient can edit, verify, and continue within declared bounds.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Wang et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 8 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: