[RFC PATCH 4/4] docs/code-provenance: make the exception process feasible

[Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>]

I do not think that anyone knows how to demonstrate "clarity of the
copyright status in relation to training".  This makes the exception
process for AI-generated code both impossible to use, and useless as a
way to inform future changes to QEMU's code provenance policies.

On the other hand, AI tools can be used as a natural language refactoring
engine for simple tasks such as modifying all callers of a given function
or even less simple ones such as adding Python type annotations.
These tasks have a very low risk of introducing training material in
the code base, and can provide noticeable time savings because they are
easily tested and reviewed; for the lack of a better term, I will call
these "tasks with limited or non-existing creative content".

Allow requesting an exception on the grounds of lack of creative content,
while keeping it clear that maintainers can deny it.

Signed-off-by: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>
---
 docs/devel/code-provenance.rst | 14 +++++++++++---
 1 file changed, 11 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)

diff --git a/docs/devel/code-provenance.rst b/docs/devel/code-provenance.rst
index a5838f63649..bfc659d2b4e 100644
--- a/docs/devel/code-provenance.rst
+++ b/docs/devel/code-provenance.rst
@@ -327,9 +327,17 @@ The QEMU project requires contributors to refrain from using AI content
 generators without going through an exception request process.
 AI-generated code will only be included in the project after the
 exception request has been evaluated by the QEMU project.  To be
-granted an exception, a contributor will need to demonstrate clarity of
-the license and copyright status for the tool's output in relation to its
-training model and code, to the satisfaction of the project maintainers.
+granted an exception, a contributor will need to demonstrate one of the
+following, to the satisfaction of the project maintainers:
+
+* clarity of the license and copyright status for the tool's output in
+  relation to its training model and code;
+
+* limited or non-existing creative content of the contribution.
+
+It is highly encouraged to provide background information such as the
+prompts that were used, and to not mix AI- and human-written code in the
+same commit, as much as possible.
 
 Maintainers are not allow to grant an exception on their own patch
 submissions.
-- 
2.51.0