Paolo Bonzini <[email protected]> writes: > Until now QEMU's code provenance policy declined any contribution > believed to include or derive from AI-generated content. A blanket ban > was easy to maintain while LLM output was rarely usable on its own, but > as the tools improved an absolute prohibition has become harder to > justify and enforce. <snip> > +Commit messages for AI-assisted changes > +''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''' > + > +In order to disclose your usage of AI/LLM tools, add an ``AI-used-for:`` > +line before the :ref:`Signed-off-by <code-provenance>` line. The trailer > +is both a reminder of your DCO obligations and a guide to reviewers. The > +text is one or more of ``code``, ``tests``, ``docs``, ``research``, possibly > +followed by an explanation in parentheses: > + > +.. code-block:: none > + > + AI-used-for: tests, docs > + AI-used-for: code > + AI-used-for: code (refactoring) > + AI-used-for: code (prototype) > + AI-used-for: research > + > +``AI-used-for`` should not be included for "background" usage such as > +autocomplete or obtaining a pre-review of the patch.
While experimenting with these tags I had done a patches with: AI-used-for: created qtest boilerplate based on bug report AI-used-for: importing and validating test case AI-used-for: initial prototype changes AI-used-for: initial draft of test AI-used-for: fetch issue, apply proposed patch, verify build and qtests Of the last one I expect "fetch issue, apply proposed patch, verify build" is superfluous as its really just automation but the converting a bug test case into a proper qtest case is worth flagging as it is a transformation worth getting called out? Either way: Reviewed-by: Alex Bennée <[email protected]> -- Alex Bennée Virtualisation Tech Lead @ Linaro
