[PATCH] docs/code-provenance: add an exception for non-creative AI changes

[Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>]

AI tools can be used as a natural language refactoring engine for simple
tasks such as modifying all callers of a given function or all accesses
to a variable.  These tasks are interesting for an exception because:

* it is credible for a contributor to claim DCO compliance.  If the
contributor can reasonably make the same change with different tools or
with just an editor, which tool is used (including an LLM) should have
no bearing on compliance.  This also applies to less simple tasks such
as adding Python type annotations.

* they are relatively easy to test and review, and can provide noticeable
time savings;

* this kind of change is easily separated from more complex non-AI-generated
ones, which we encourage people to do anyway.  It is therefore natural
to highlight them as AI-generated.

Make an exception for patches that have "limited creative content" - that
is, mechanical transformations where the creativity lies in deciding what
to change rather than in how to implement the change.

Signed-off-by: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>
---
 docs/devel/code-provenance.rst | 27 +++++++++++++++++++++++----
 1 file changed, 23 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)

diff --git a/docs/devel/code-provenance.rst b/docs/devel/code-provenance.rst
index 8cdc56f6649..d6e86636964 100644
--- a/docs/devel/code-provenance.rst
+++ b/docs/devel/code-provenance.rst
@@ -290,9 +290,11 @@ Use of AI-generated content
 
 TL;DR:
 
-  **Current QEMU project policy is to DECLINE any contributions which are
+  **The general QEMU project policy is to DECLINE any contributions which are
   believed to include or derive from AI generated content. This includes
-  ChatGPT, Claude, Copilot, Llama and similar tools.**
+  ChatGPT, Claude, Copilot, Llama and similar tools.** The following exceptions
+  are acceptable:
+  * **Limited creative content** (e.g., mechanical transformations)
 
   **This policy does not apply to other uses of AI, such as researching APIs
   or algorithms, static analysis, or debugging, provided their output is not
@@ -323,8 +325,9 @@ content generators commonly available today is unclear.  The QEMU project is
 not willing or able to accept the legal risks of non-compliance.
 
 The QEMU project thus requires that contributors refrain from using AI content
-generators on patches intended to be submitted to the project, and will
-decline any contribution if use of AI is either known or suspected.
+generators on patches intended to be submitted to the project, with exceptions
+outlined below.  If use of AI is known or suspected to go beyond the exceptions,
+QEMU will decline a contribution.
 
 Examples of tools impacted by this policy includes GitHub's CoPilot, OpenAI's
 ChatGPT, Anthropic's Claude, and Meta's Code Llama, and code/content
@@ -347,3 +350,19 @@ 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.
+
+The following exceptions are currently in place:
+
+**Limited creative content**
+  Mechanical transformations where there is reasonably only one way to
+  implement the change.  Any tool, as well as a manual change, would
+  produce substantially the same modifications to the code.  Examples
+  include adjustments to data structures, mechanical API migrations,
+  or applying non-functional changes uniformly across a codebase.
+
+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 should ask for a second opinion and avoid applying the
+exception to their own patch submissions.
-- 
2.51.0