Am Montag, dem 09.10.2023 um 23:03 +0200 schrieb b...@bokr.com: > Hi, > > On +2023-10-09 20:33:38 +0200, Liliana Marie Prikler wrote: > > I don't necessarily agree, but it's not a hard disagree either. > > I'll try to keep that in mind at least when reviewing your patches > > to not cause confusion. > > > > Cheers > > > > TL;DR: Would it make sense to anticipate that LLM-bots will be used > to automate gathering of info for reviewers? > > If so, what would a style guide for english in posts (like > a coding style guide, but for LLM-bot consumption) look like? > Some kind of literate programming for LLM-bot and human use? Let's not rely on large language models. If we are going to automate this, it ought to be through interpretable, "rule-based" systems. Like, imagine that on top of telling debbugs to close a bug etc., you could tell debbugs (or some other tool) that some patch or a series looks good to you. We could then add an interface to allow filtering for "looks good" series for quick patch application, the rationale being that committers have to do less or no review of their own as they commit to a patch or series.*
Cheers * They should still check that the series actually looks good to enough folks.
