On Fri, Jan 09, 2026 at 10:28:46AM -0500, Steven Rostedt wrote: > On Fri, 9 Jan 2026 07:28:01 +0000 > Lorenzo Stoakes <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > It's better to have a grumpy document, instead of grumpy emails. We > > > need it to sound grumpy and it needs to be the first paragraph. > > I disagree. Specifically because of what Linus had said (see below). > > > > > > > AI Slop: AI can generate a ton of patches automatically which creates a > > > burden on the upstream maintainers. The maintainers need to review > > > every line of every patch and they expect the submitters to demonstrate > > > that even the generated code was verified to be accurate. If you are > > > unsure of whether a patch is appropriate then do not send it. NO AI > > > SLOP! > > > > > > Of course, sensible people don't need to be told this stuff, but there > > > are well intentioned people who need it explained. > > > > > > regards, > > > dan carpenter > > > > > > > Exactly. > > > > Every version of watering it down just makes it meaningless noise. The > > point is > > to emphasise this. > > The thing is, the AI slop sending culprits are not going to be the ones to > read this. It's the people who want to do the right thing that this > document is focused on and that's why I think it should be more welcoming.
I think you and Linus are wrong about this. There are a class of 'good intent bad results' people who will absolutely do this _and_ pay attention to the document. I expect you as a maintainer must have run into this, I know I have! And given how inaccurate that register article was, I think you can see that having something clear matters from that perspective too, in practice. > > That said, I just started looking at your other email and that does look > better. I'll reply there. Thanks! > > -- Steve Cheers, Lorenzo
