From: Elijah Newren Date: Fri, 03 Oct 2025 20:48:40 GMT Subject: Re: [PATCH v2] SubmittingPatches: add section about AI Message-ID: In-Reply-To: On Wed, Oct 1, 2025 at 2:37 PM brian m. carlson wrote: > > On 2025-10-01 at 14:02:50, Christian Couder wrote: > > +[[ai]] > > +=== Use of Artificial Intelligence (AI) > > + > > +The Developer's Certificate of Origin requires contributors to certify > > +that they know the origin of their contributions to the project and > > +that they have the right to submit it under the project's license. > > +It's not yet clear that this can be legally satisfied when submitting > > +significant amount of content that has been generated by AI tools. > > Perhaps we'd like to write this: > > It's not yet clear that this can be legally satisfied when submitting > significant amount of content that has been generated by AI tools, > so we cannot accept this content in our project. > > If we're going to have a policy, we need to be direct about it and not > let people draw their own conclusions. Many people don't have English > as a first language and we don't want people trying to language lawyer. > > We could say something like this: > > Please do not sign off your work if you’re using an LLM to contribute > unless you have included copyright and license information for all the > code used in that LLM. Would this mean that you wanted to ban contributions like d12166d3c8bb (Merge branch 'en/docfixes', 2023-10-23), available on the list over at https://lore.kernel.org/git/pull.1595.git.1696747527.gitgitgadget@gmail.com/ ? We don't need to go theoretical, I've already contributed such a patch series before -- 2 years ago -- and it was merged. Granted, that was entirely documentation, and I called out the usage of AI in the cover letter, and I manually checked every change (discarding many of them) and split it into commits on my own, could easily explain any change and why it was good, etc. And I was upfront about all of it. If any use of AI is bad, do we need to revert that series?