Re: [PATCH v2] docs/devel: relax policy on AI-generated contributions

["Daniel P. Berrangé" <berrange@redhat.com>]

On Wed, Jun 17, 2026 at 10:38:55AM +0200, Kevin Wolf wrote:
> Am 16.06.2026 um 19:06 hat Christian Borntraeger geschrieben:
> > Am 29.05.26 um 11:46 schrieb Paolo Bonzini:
> > > -Exceptions do not remove the need for authors to comply with all other
> > > -requirements for contribution.  In particular, the "Signed-off-by"
> > > -label in a patch submission is a statement that the author takes
> > > -responsibility for the entire contents of the patch, including any parts
> > > -that were generated or assisted by AI tools or other tools.
> > > +.. 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.
> > 
> > So what about using AI for security scanning? So how do we want to treat
> > a patch from a human that is based on an AI report.
> > And if ok, would we then add something like
> > 
> > Reported-by: Claude, chatgpt whatever?
> 
> I think it's effectively the same as Coverity, which we don't
> acknowledge with a Reported-by tag, though we often mention it in the
> commit message text. The same practice would make sense to me here.
> 
> (Though of course for Coverity, we have the CID, which obviously doesn't
> exist for things found with a one-off LLM run, so there is some
> difference there.)

Incidentally does any ever find the CID to be useful in the commit
message ?

With regards,
Daniel
-- 
|: https://berrange.com       ~~        https://hachyderm.io/@berrange :|
|: https://libvirt.org          ~~          https://entangle-photo.org :|
|: https://pixelfed.art/berrange   ~~    https://fstop138.berrange.com :|