On Wed, Sep 02, 2026 at 09:09:59AM +0200, Paolo Bonzini wrote: > Thanks for the review! > > On 9/2/26 03:38, Alistair Francis wrote: > > > +Prohibited use of AI > > > +'''''''''''''''''''' > > > + > > > +The following items **MUST** be written by humans: > > > + > > > +- cover letters and commit messages > > > + > > > +- responses to reviewer comments > > > + > > > +- issue descriptions or comments > > > + > > > +Light copy editing of human-written text with an AI is allowed. > > > > What about translations? Not everyone can write English well and I see > > translations being useful. > > Difficult choice. I can see that it's useful, but we've never been > hardliners for English grammar, and translation may cause agent-ese to slip > in.
And it does! My suggestion: - demand that contributor writes text in english. if someone is speaking to us through an LLM due to a complete lack of english .... do we really want that? - add text in AGENTS.md along the lines of: When asked to fix up english syntax/grammar, DO NOT MAKE style or wording changes beyond correctness. Limit your text changes to solely fixing correctness issues or coding style violations. Also, if the meaning is ambiguous, do not pick a possible meaning, instead insert a question for the user and prompt the user to clarify. > I am not a native speaker but I wouldn't use this possibility, so I'm > not the best person to decide. > > That said, if somebody asked the agent for help translating, it would > probably do it anyway. > > > > - small LLM-assisted bugfixes (as a rule of thumb, below 10 lines of > > > code) are allowed with disclosure. Splitting a submission in multiple > > > parts is **not** a valid way to bypass this rule; repeated, frequent > > > posting of such fixes must follow the rule for full contributions. > > > > Maybe add something like (fell free to edit): > > > > """ > > When submitting LLM generated bug fixes the human should clearly > > describe what the bug is, how it is triggered and how it impacted them. > > The idea her is that we don't want people pointing an LLM at the source > > and generating "bug fixes" for issues that users aren't seeing. This > > can result in reviewer burnout. > > I left that out because the document is already very long. My suspicion is > that the agent is able to infer most of it thanks to the "understanding" > part of AGENTS.md, and reviewer burnout is covered by forbidding repeated > posting of this kind of fix. > > > > - use of LLMs to help generating parts of a larger patch---a test > > > case, a parser, boilerplate code for a new API, a tool to help > > > performing mechanical changes, etc. These are generally allowed, but > > > disclosure is recommended. > > > > disclosure should just be required here as well. > > I think it depends in general. Sometimes there is really just one way to > write code in this bucket, and in that case disclosure is superfluous (see > for example the "impl<T: ToMigrationState> ToMigrationState for Mutex<T>" > block in rust/migration/src/migratable.rs). The AGENTS.md file will cause > the agent to recommend it anyway. > > Paolo
