From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from perceval.ideasonboard.com (perceval.ideasonboard.com [213.167.242.64]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 377A8345757; Tue, 7 Jul 2026 15:05:16 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=213.167.242.64 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1783436720; cv=none; b=gRa8zEhzZ1syJ9nbozOY1L9dydbynpFJlSOq7F6tkyZ10MiOjIe5BFyH7CZC383i8G2fZLi+QEfde5udXc44s+3NRg+CV+s4knP0FrutQSMRCnJY52DNPLUPJxi3yvT/HrEkc/iNIvIwt9+awyLRt8FH5r3fiyYqflHEpsDJnb8= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1783436720; c=relaxed/simple; bh=V2izBQ5ocu19EBM8LWCHNqThTRdZz0FHDwzAwqwu1lI=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:References:MIME-Version: Content-Type:Content-Disposition:In-Reply-To; b=m6zlT5n7DzKUF8J6Sq+oaTSQlC5qD84mGSHm8vvMG46m1/6XShVK6cdG/lOtCP2RtcQ0IbeAEmLHr21RY3xneb3vRYInvccx1FmMcYnVL3NnWdV/a4omNBB3qQ24A4fvZYKHGW+BDo9mhCPbAY5NIQMEyPPHhPJTaDZKyS1rXuU= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=ideasonboard.com; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=ideasonboard.com; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=ideasonboard.com header.i=@ideasonboard.com header.b=g38ixdE/; arc=none smtp.client-ip=213.167.242.64 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dmarc=pass (p=none dis=none) header.from=ideasonboard.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=ideasonboard.com Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=ideasonboard.com header.i=@ideasonboard.com header.b="g38ixdE/" Received: from killaraus.ideasonboard.com (2001-14ba-70f3-e800--a06.rev.dnainternet.fi [IPv6:2001:14ba:70f3:e800::a06]) by perceval.ideasonboard.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id C11ACBAE; Tue, 7 Jul 2026 17:04:23 +0200 (CEST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=ideasonboard.com; s=mail; t=1783436664; bh=V2izBQ5ocu19EBM8LWCHNqThTRdZz0FHDwzAwqwu1lI=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:Subject:References:In-Reply-To:From; b=g38ixdE/e5n+AFvp0Y1waO7j9Ey6zh42gm8UwpI9m2Fqvq1pHCXCi3XNjS+hyFPxC Cjtcz5mmn47QZ54GljMfIS7Isrg5AaGs/ETTqbbqUn2OnmzlcJgnW8C4g+9JMxX7iE jTH8ZqjHmK8IvLnHE1QMwHo47AMvqOibxiREoNj8= Date: Tue, 7 Jul 2026 18:05:11 +0300 From: Laurent Pinchart To: Lorenzo Stoakes Cc: "David Hildenbrand (Arm)" , Boris Burkov , Jeff Layton , Greg KH , Linus Torvalds , Jonathan Corbet , Justin Stitt , Carlos Maiolino , Jakub Kicinski , Jori Koolstra , Krzysztof Kozlowski , Brian Foster , Christoph Hellwig , David Disseldorp , Mark Brown , Jani Nikula , Jens Axboe , Vlastimil Babka , "Christian Brauner (Amutable)" , workflows@vger.kernel.org, linux-doc@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-fsdevel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] Documentation: remove the requirement for LLM attribution Message-ID: <20260707150511.GB254690@killaraus.ideasonboard.com> References: <3f447113-4407-471f-878f-e6d6edafee71@kernel.org> <20260703163251.GB3734786@killaraus.ideasonboard.com> <0ba6bf66-e48f-40df-a953-503d317b3dbe@kernel.org> <20260707124031.GC211515@killaraus.ideasonboard.com> <20260707141803.GA254690@killaraus.ideasonboard.com> Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: linux-doc@vger.kernel.org List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: On Tue, Jul 07, 2026 at 03:59:48PM +0100, Lorenzo Stoakes wrote: > On Tue, Jul 07, 2026 at 05:18:03PM +0300, Laurent Pinchart wrote: > > I haven't heard anyone involved in this mail thread objecting to the > > concepts you translated into sentences below, so I think it's worth a > > try. Of course there may be objections from people who are not aware of > > this very conversation. > > To risk repeating myself - why does it all have to be in one? > > Send the non-controversial bit, get that merged so it's there, then follow it up > with this. Simple no? :) Sure, but I don't know what part would be the most controversial :-) I haven't heard any objection in this mail thread. > Sending this, getting it rejected, then having people's backs up because they'll > tie the two things together seems the less politically astute move. -- Regards, Laurent Pinchart