On 12/16/25 2:33 PM, Frode Nordahl wrote: > On 12/16/25 12:55, Dumitru Ceara via dev wrote: >> On 12/16/25 11:46 AM, Ilya Maximets wrote: >>> On 12/16/25 11:33 AM, Frode Nordahl wrote: >>>> On 12/16/25 10:25, Dumitru Ceara wrote: >>>>> On 12/15/25 10:09 PM, Frode Nordahl wrote: >>>>>> The Assisted-by tag is used to disclose the use of AI assistants in >>>>>> creating patches. This tag was already mentioned in the AI-assisted >>>>>> Contributions section but was not documented in the Tags section. >>>>>> >>>>>> Following OOB discussion, the tag should include only the product >>>>>> name >>>>>> of the AI assistant, not an email address. >>>>>> >>>>>> Assisted-by: GitHub Copilot >>>>>> Signed-off-by: Frode Nordahl <[email protected]> >>>>>> --- >>>>>> >>>>>> github copilot cli prompt BEGIN: >>>>>> Context >>>>>> ======= >>>>>> >>>>>> The current working directory contains a bootstrapped and built >>>>>> copy of the >>>>>> Open Virtual Network (OVN) project, which is also publicly >>>>>> available from >>>>>> https://github.com/ovn-org/ovn.git. >>>>>> >>>>>> Assignment >>>>>> ========== >>>>>> >>>>>> 1. >>>>>> On the back of OOB discussion it was also decided that upstream >>>>>> does not >>>>>> want e-mail address in the Assisted-by tag, only the product name >>>>>> of the >>>>>> agent. >>>>>> >>>>>> It was also highlighted that the Assisted-by tag is not currently >>>>>> documented. >>>>>> >>>>>> Can you propose a patch and commit it to the local git respotory >>>>>> that adds >>>>>> this documentation to the Tags section of: >>>>>> Documentation/internals/contributing/submitting-patches.rst. >>>>>> >>>>>> Make sure to adapt your proposal so it fits with language and tone of >>>>>> voice used in the rest of that section. >>>>>> >>>>>> 2. >>>>>> Previously you helped me craft a patch proposal for OVN which has >>>>>> received >>>>>> review comments: >>>>>> https://patchwork.ozlabs.org/project/ovn/ >>>>>> patch/[email protected]/ >>>>>> >>>>>> Please propose a v3 patch that addresses the feedback and commit >>>>>> it to the >>>>>> local Git repository, remember to update the commit message. >>>>>> END >>>>>> github copilot cli transcript: https://gist.github.com/ >>>>>> fnordahl/72af273b96cf60a0e49b111e3efc4372 >>>>>> >>>>>> .../contributing/submitting-patches.rst | 16 +++++++++ >>>>>> +++++++ >>>>>> 1 file changed, 16 insertions(+) >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Hi Frode, >>>>> >>>>> Thanks for the documentation update! >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>> diff --git a/Documentation/internals/contributing/submitting- >>>>>> patches.rst b/Documentation/internals/contributing/submitting- >>>>>> patches.rst >>>>>> index 1d6fa5e45..3e7854607 100644 >>>>>> --- a/Documentation/internals/contributing/submitting-patches.rst >>>>>> +++ b/Documentation/internals/contributing/submitting-patches.rst >>>>>> @@ -329,6 +329,22 @@ Examples of common tags follow. >>>>>> appropriate to cite the URL to the report in a Reported-at >>>>>> tag. Use a Reported-by tag to acknowledge the reporters. >>>>>> >>>>>> +``Assisted-by: Product Name`` >>>>> >>>>> Would it make sense to call it "AI Code Assistant" instead of "Product >>>>> Name"? >>>> >>>> Seems reasonable to me. >>>> >>>>>> + >>>>>> + When a patch has been created with the assistance of an AI tool, >>>>>> + this tag should be used to disclose that fact. Only include the >>>>>> + product name of the AI assistant, not an email address. For >>>>>> + example: >>>>>> + >>>>>> + :: >>>>>> + >>>>>> + Assisted-by: GitHub Copilot >>>>>> + >>>>> >>>>> The few AI-assisted contributions we had until now did the attribution >>>>> in the following way: >>>>> >>>>> Assisted-by: Cursor, with model: Claude Sonnet 4.5 >>>>> Assisted-by: gemini-cli, with model: gemini-3-pro-preview >>>>> Assisted-by: gemini-cli, with model: gemini-3-pro-preview >>>>> >>>>> Do you think it makes sense to mention that the model should be >>>>> listed, >>>>> if possible? >>>> >>>> I can swear I did a search for use of the tag prior to posting this >>>> patch, >>>> but apparently I searched OVS and not OVN repository. >>>> >>>> Including the model name in addition to the code assistant would >>>> indeed be useful. >>> >>> How? :) The results are unlikely to be reproducible. Also, in many >>> cases >>> it's not possible to tell which exact model was used as most products >>> are >>> routing requests through multiple of them. >>> >> >> I guess the only use I can see for the model name is the case when a >> specific model (version) is found to be generating "bad" code (I won't >> expand on what "bad" means and keep it vague on purpose). In such cases >> we could at least get an indication of some of the commits that need to >> be re-audited because they have been written with the help of that >> specific model. >> >>> I'd suggest documenting something like: >>> >>> Assisted-by: AI Code Assistant or Model Name >>> >> >> That works for me too I guess. The code assistant itself matters less >> so if we have the model name it's probably best to just stick with that. > > So let's make it: > > Assisted-by: Name of Model, and/or AI Code Assistant > > With some wording on preference if only one is to be provided. >
Works for me. >>> I'd also suggest to avoid placing some specific product name in the >>> example >>> section and mention something bogus or at least open, e.g.: >>> >>> Assisted-by: OVN-Code-Assistant-Pro-9.0 >> >> Why not 2.0? 2.0 is always known to be the best version. (/jk) > > Assisted-by: model-name-42.0, ACME-Code-Assistant > > A fictional entity name such as ACME might make it applicable to both > OVS and OVN trees, or we could use a nonsensical (in this context) name > that both projects already are associated with, such as Linux- > Foundation-Code-Assistant. > I'm no expert but it seems to me that ACME is actually a registered trademark. :) Maybe "OVN=Code-Assistant-Pro-9.0" is the safest option. >>> >>> WDYT? >>> >> >> Sounds good to me. >> >>>> >>>> PS: What are your thoughts on including details of prompt and >>>> possibly transcript >>>> in cover letter or below the --- in M/L posts, is that something we >>>> should encourage >>>> in the documentation? >>>> >> >> I'm not sure about that. I'm afraid that might steer people away from >> disclosing the usage of the code assistant as it is "more work". > > Ack. > >>>> Thank you for taking the time to review I'll post an update asap. >>>> >>>> >>> >> >> Thanks, just an FYI, I'm planning to apply the 2/2 patch soon as it's >> unrelated to this change. > > Thx! > _______________________________________________ dev mailing list [email protected] https://mail.openvswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/ovs-dev
