On Wed, 01 Jul 2026 10:08:11 -0600, Jonathan Corbet wrote: > > Why precisely do we require all this detailed information about what > > specific coding assistant was used? > > From my memory of the discussions: > > - If a specific LLM turns out to be in a bad position with regard to > some copyright ruling, we can identify the commits that might have > been tainted by it. > > - Similarly should an LLM prove to have an inclination toward specific > types of security issues. > > Whether either of these would ever actually prove useful is not > something I can hazard a guess for.
In https://lwn.net/Articles/854645/ (An update on the UMN affair) you documented a case where an organization acted maliciously, resulting in the need to audit (and revert) numerous commits based on git authorship metadata. IMO the existing Assisted-by tags, although far from perfect, will be useful for audits when a specific LLM coding assistant is similarly found to be generating malicious output. Thanks, David
