Re: on ai generated and code provenance

["Michael S. Tsirkin" <mst@redhat.com>]

On Thu, May 28, 2026 at 11:59:35AM +1000, Alistair Francis wrote:
> > My worry has been one of testing: how do I test it all? Or do I continue
> > to use the 'just build thousands of packages' as the acid test?
> >
> >>
> >> So maybe we should add something here about don't send large numbers
> >> of "small bug fix" patches. So someone doesn't point an AI at QEMU and
> >> a spec and generate huge numbers of patches, all of which are just
> >> small bug fixes.
> >
> >
> > Wouldn't this concern fall under the general requirement to not send more
> > than a manageable number of patches at a time (like 50)? Or do you think
> > a lower number is warranted?
> 
> I could see someone reading the proposed wording and then sending one
> 20 line patch, then another, then another, then another, then another,
> then another and then more. All while only sending "small patches",
> but the ability to generate a large number.
> 
> It's not clear to me at least from the proposed wording that we should
> discourage that.
> 
> Alistair


Maybe we shouldn't? It's far from trivial to split up functionality even
in 100 line self contained chunks, let alone 20. And reviewing
such small patches is *easy*.


-- 
MST