From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org Received: from lists.gnu.org (lists.gnu.org [209.51.188.17]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 74C83C5B543 for ; Wed, 4 Jun 2025 07:16:27 +0000 (UTC) Received: from localhost ([::1] helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1uMiM7-0001Qs-90; Wed, 04 Jun 2025 03:16:11 -0400 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1uMiM4-0001QW-Vm for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 04 Jun 2025 03:16:09 -0400 Received: from us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com ([170.10.129.124]) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1uMiLz-0007CV-68 for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 04 Jun 2025 03:16:07 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=redhat.com; s=mimecast20190719; t=1749021361; h=from:from:reply-to:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date: message-id:message-id:to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version: content-type:content-type: content-transfer-encoding:content-transfer-encoding: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=/BhegTg/JUfjCGYVPMJvqYqOoah3FSeY1a+RbVbuSSo=; b=HMwGinDc7L5f57jh+MVJYa40gLyi1X7vRXz6IElBaeICFj0DppJeT0XtT+JES0mli3/obh X2kJb5XCBLDq0TlOnsF9GZA+CknuCLG5gRzHmiWoeGdMUBV5OBAMufIWEBzreo0alFeaq0 hKLZWaKpT/lJbVFTeJpnAMNtVUgxNPU= Received: from mx-prod-mc-08.mail-002.prod.us-west-2.aws.redhat.com (ec2-35-165-154-97.us-west-2.compute.amazonaws.com [35.165.154.97]) by relay.mimecast.com with ESMTP with STARTTLS (version=TLSv1.3, cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id us-mta-167-_J3SAJZxNACKl5wd7DTTlA-1; Wed, 04 Jun 2025 03:15:57 -0400 X-MC-Unique: _J3SAJZxNACKl5wd7DTTlA-1 X-Mimecast-MFC-AGG-ID: _J3SAJZxNACKl5wd7DTTlA_1749021356 Received: from mx-prod-int-03.mail-002.prod.us-west-2.aws.redhat.com (mx-prod-int-03.mail-002.prod.us-west-2.aws.redhat.com [10.30.177.12]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by mx-prod-mc-08.mail-002.prod.us-west-2.aws.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4B4D3180045B; Wed, 4 Jun 2025 07:15:56 +0000 (UTC) Received: from redhat.com (unknown [10.42.28.60]) by mx-prod-int-03.mail-002.prod.us-west-2.aws.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id CF72C19560AE; Wed, 4 Jun 2025 07:15:50 +0000 (UTC) Date: Wed, 4 Jun 2025 08:15:47 +0100 From: Daniel =?utf-8?B?UC4gQmVycmFuZ8Op?= To: Markus Armbruster Cc: Stefan Hajnoczi , qemu-devel@nongnu.org, Thomas Huth , Alex =?utf-8?Q?Benn=C3=A9e?= , "Michael S . Tsirkin" , Gerd Hoffmann , Mark Cave-Ayland , Philippe =?utf-8?Q?Mathieu-Daud=C3=A9?= , Kevin Wolf , Stefan Hajnoczi , Alexander Graf , Paolo Bonzini , Richard Henderson , Peter Maydell Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 3/3] docs: define policy forbidding use of AI code generators Message-ID: References: <20250603142524.4043193-1-armbru@redhat.com> <20250603142524.4043193-4-armbru@redhat.com> <87a56o1154.fsf@pond.sub.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit In-Reply-To: <87a56o1154.fsf@pond.sub.org> User-Agent: Mutt/2.2.14 (2025-02-20) X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 3.0 on 10.30.177.12 Received-SPF: pass client-ip=170.10.129.124; envelope-from=berrange@redhat.com; helo=us-smtp-delivery-124.mimecast.com X-Spam_score_int: -21 X-Spam_score: -2.2 X-Spam_bar: -- X-Spam_report: (-2.2 / 5.0 requ) BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIMWL_WL_HIGH=-0.128, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H5=0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=0.001, RCVD_IN_VALIDITY_CERTIFIED_BLOCKED=0.001, RCVD_IN_VALIDITY_RPBL_BLOCKED=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no X-Spam_action: no action X-BeenThere: qemu-devel@nongnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Reply-To: Daniel =?utf-8?B?UC4gQmVycmFuZ8Op?= Errors-To: qemu-devel-bounces+qemu-devel=archiver.kernel.org@nongnu.org Sender: qemu-devel-bounces+qemu-devel=archiver.kernel.org@nongnu.org On Wed, Jun 04, 2025 at 08:17:27AM +0200, Markus Armbruster wrote: > Stefan Hajnoczi writes: > > > On Tue, Jun 3, 2025 at 10:25 AM Markus Armbruster wrote: > >> > >> From: Daniel P. Berrangé >> + > >> +The increasing prevalence of AI code generators, most notably but not limited > > > > More detail is needed on what an "AI code generator" is. Coding > > assistant tools range from autocompletion to linters to automatic code > > generators. In addition there are other AI-related tools like ChatGPT > > or Gemini as a chatbot that can people use like Stackoverflow or an > > API documentation summarizer. > > > > I think the intent is to say: do not put code that comes from _any_ AI > > tool into QEMU. > > > > It would be okay to use AI to research APIs, algorithms, brainstorm > > ideas, debug the code, analyze the code, etc but the actual code > > changes must not be generated by AI. The scope of the policy is around contributions we receive as patches with SoB. Researching / brainstorming / analysis etc are not contribution activities, so not covered by the policy IMHO. > > The existing text is about "AI code generators". However, the "most > notably LLMs" that follows it could lead readers to believe it's about > more than just code generation, because LLMs are in fact used for more. > I figure this is your concern. > > We could instead start wide, then narrow the focus to code generation. > Here's my try: > > The increasing prevalence of AI-assisted software development results > in a number of difficult legal questions and risks for software > projects, including QEMU. Of particular concern is code generated by > `Large Language Models > `__ (LLMs). Documentation we maintain has the same concerns as code. So I'd suggest to substitute 'code' with 'code / content'. > If we want to mention uses of AI we consider okay, I'd do so further > down, to not distract from the main point here. Perhaps: > > The QEMU project thus requires that contributors refrain from using AI code > generators on patches intended to be submitted to the project, and will > decline any contribution if use of AI is either known or suspected. > > This policy does not apply to other uses of AI, such as researching APIs or > algorithms, static analysis, or debugging. > > Examples of tools impacted by this policy includes both GitHub's CoPilot, > OpenAI's ChatGPT, and Meta's Code Llama, amongst many others which are less > well known. > > The paragraph in the middle is new, the other two are unchanged. > > Thoughts? IMHO its redundant, as the policy is expressly around contribution of code/content, and those activities as not contribution related, so outside the scope already. > > >> +to, `Large Language Models `__ > >> +(LLMs) results in a number of difficult legal questions and risks for software > >> +projects, including QEMU. > > Thanks! > > [...] > With regards, Daniel -- |: https://berrange.com -o- https://www.flickr.com/photos/dberrange :| |: https://libvirt.org -o- https://fstop138.berrange.com :| |: https://entangle-photo.org -o- https://www.instagram.com/dberrange :|