On 10/13/2026 2:26 AM, Daniel P. Berrangé wrote: > On Wed, Oct 07, 2026 at 04:24:07PM -0700, Pierrick Bouvier wrote: >> On 10/7/2026 3:54 PM, Yonggang Luo wrote: >>> My work is here. >>> https://gitlab.com/lygstate-qemu/qemu/-/tree/combined-binary-multi-targets?ref_type=heads >>> I am afraid of posting 300 pathces into threads to flood it(and >>> disturbing yours). So I'll wait for your work first. and resolving >>> conflicts later, that's really time-consuming. >>> >> >> It's indeed not possible to send 300 patches and expect this to work, >> whether it's on this mailing list, or any software forge also. >> It's also not possible to send a link, and expect anyone to take a look >> at the 373 commits sitting it on top of master. My name is not Claude. >> Instead, humans have to progress step by step, based on feedback. Yes it >> takes time and it can be frustrating. And yes, I've been there (and >> frustrated) also, I feel sorry for you. >> >> At the moment, if we want to make it move on, we need to focus on one >> single thing: >> "How to document/specify which targets a machine support". >> >>> I did many explanations before. seems my explanation is too bad and >>> not to give a clean picture for you, let's delay these first. >>> >> >> If I can suggest something politely here, IMHO, alternating between >> genuinely human written messages, and AI content sent as it is on email >> or commit messages is not helping on the receiver side. >> >> I would prefer anytime to deal with imperfect english (mine is imperfect >> too, I'm not a native speaker neither), compared to read what >> Claude/GPT/Deepseek generated that was pasted as it is. >> I understand it's a good tool for helping on the language side, and >> that's ok to fix grammar and sentence structure. >> But asking "Please generate a summary from those email threads and >> explain what the current series is doing", and paste this is doomed to fail. >> >> It also has a very detrimental side effect: it makes me start to wonder >> where the code is coming from also. Especially when seeing boilerplates >> with lengthy comments written in perfect english. My 2 cents is, use AI >> if you want/need, but make sure the result has this *human* touch. > > Although these are not yet final/commited, please bear in mind the > proposed updated AI guidelines which broadly intend to forbid use > of AI for authoring commit messages & cover letters: > > https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/qemu-devel/2026-09/msg00260.html >
While the AI discussion is on going, maybe it would be nice to forbid that on the mailing list also. > > With regards, > Daniel
