Re: [PATCH 1/4] docs/devel: relax policy on AI-generated contributions

["Alex Bennée" <alex.bennee@linaro.org>]

Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com> writes:

> Until now QEMU's code provenance policy declined any contribution
> believed to include or derive from AI-generated content.  A blanket ban
> was easy to maintain while LLM output was rarely usable on its own, but
> as the tools improved an absolute prohibition has become harder to
> justify and enforce.
<snip>
> +Commit messages for AI-assisted changes
> +'''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''
> +
> +In order to disclose your usage of AI/LLM tools, add an ``AI-used-for:``
> +line before the :ref:`Signed-off-by <code-provenance>` line.  The trailer
> +is both a reminder of your DCO obligations and a guide to reviewers.  The
> +text is one or more of ``code``, ``tests``, ``docs``, ``research``, possibly
> +followed by an explanation in parentheses:
> +
> +.. code-block:: none
> +
> +     AI-used-for: tests, docs
> +     AI-used-for: code
> +     AI-used-for: code (refactoring)
> +     AI-used-for: code (prototype)
> +     AI-used-for: research
> +
> +``AI-used-for`` should not be included for "background" usage such as
> +autocomplete or obtaining a pre-review of the patch.

While experimenting with these tags I had done a patches with:

  AI-used-for: created qtest boilerplate based on bug report
  AI-used-for: importing and validating test case
  AI-used-for: initial prototype changes
  AI-used-for: initial draft of test
  AI-used-for: fetch issue, apply proposed patch, verify build and qtests

Of the last one I expect "fetch issue, apply proposed patch, verify
build" is superfluous as its really just automation but the converting a
bug test case into a proper qtest case is worth flagging as it is a
transformation worth getting called out?

Either way:

Reviewed-by: Alex Bennée <alex.bennee@linaro.org>

-- 
Alex Bennée
Virtualisation Tech Lead @ Linaro