+1 Thanks Alin J
On Fri, 3 Jul 2026, 17:35 Matteo Golin, <[email protected]> wrote: > Also, thank you Alin for the link! If the vote passes, we can add the > format the Linux kernel prescribes as our format guide for the Assisted-by > field as well: > > Assisted-by: AGENT_NAME:MODEL_VERSION [TOOL1] [TOOL2] > > Best, > Matteo > > On Fri, Jul 3, 2026 at 10:32 AM Matteo Golin <[email protected]> > wrote: > > > I am alright with changing to "Assisted-by:" to be in line with other > > major projects. The main goal is just to tag what has used generative AI. > > > > However, Alan, I would note that we shouldn't impart any implied meaning > > on the tag beyond "generative AI was used". We have (and still are) > > receiving PRs that were fully generated by AI where the developer *was > *passive. > > These are the minority, but they will still have to use the same > > "Assisted-by: " tag. So, if we are using the "Assisted-by:" tag, perhaps > we > > should indicate somewhere that > > > > "The presence of the 'Assisted-by: ' field in a commit message simply > > indicates the use of generative tooling, but does not make any claim > about > > the extent to which the tool was used or how involved the developer was > in > > the commit's creation. NuttX only tags commits that made use of > generative > > tooling and does not make guarantees about in what manner they were > used." > > > > In light of these comments, a vote for +1 here would still mean the same > > thing except that we will use 'Assisted-by' in place of 'Generated-by:'. > > > > Best, > > Matteo > > > > On Fri, Jul 3, 2026 at 10:25 AM Alan C. Assis <[email protected]> wrote: > > > >> Hi Matteo, > >> > >> I think "Assisted-by:" as Alin suggested is better than "Generated-by:" > >> > >> The former is more like an assistant and the later sounds more like the > >> developer was passive. > >> > >> BR, > >> > >> Alan > >> > >> On Fri, Jul 3, 2026 at 11:03 AM Matteo Golin <[email protected]> > >> wrote: > >> > >> > Hello everyone, > >> > > >> > While we continue to discuss an AI policy for NuttX, one thing I think > >> we > >> > can agree on is to adopt the Apache Software Foundation guideline for > >> > generative tooling that recommends the following: > >> > > >> > "When providing contributions authored using generative AI tooling, a > >> > recommended practice is for contributors to indicate the tooling used > to > >> > create the contribution. This should be included as a token in the > >> source > >> > control commit message, for example including the phrase > “Generated-by: > >> ”. > >> > This allows for future release tooling to be considered that pulls > this > >> > content into a machine parsable Tooling-Provenance file" [1] > >> > > >> > I am proposing a vote on requiring the "Generated-by: " tag for > >> > contributions using AI tooling in accordance with the ASF guidelines. > If > >> > this vote passes, the following text would be added to the > contribution > >> > guide (section 1.5): > >> > > >> > "Contributions authored with the use of generative AI-tooling must > >> include > >> > a 'Generated-by:' tag in the commit message to identify the generative > >> > tooling that was used in the contribution's creation. This tag should > be > >> > placed above the 'Signed-off by:' tag in the commit message." > >> > > >> > And the 'Generated-by: ' tag will be added as a required field in > >> section > >> > 1.6 of the Contribution guide. > >> > > >> > Best, > >> > Matteo > >> > > >> > [1]: https://www.apache.org/legal/generative-tooling.html > >> > > >> > > >
