> On May 16, 2026, at 8:20 AM, Konstantin Ryabitsev <[email protected]> wrote: > > On Sat, May 16, 2026 at 05:11:28AM -0700, Guenter Roeck wrote: >>> On Sat, May 16, 2026 at 10:05:02AM +0200, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote: >>> What the hell is that: >>> >>> https://lore.kernel.org/all/[email protected]/ >>> >>> As a bot you CANNOT MAKE a Reviewer's statement of oversight. You are >>> not a damn human do be able to make such statement. You are a bot, a tool. >>> >> >> Where exactly do the rules say that ? I seem to miss that. >> >> There is a policy document about _contributions_ made by AI, but I don't >> see the one that says that AI agents must not provide Reviewed-by: tags. > > From my perspective, AI agents must NOT use the Reviewed-by tag for the > following reasons: > > - We consider this a "person-trailer" and it implies agency > - Adding yourself to a commit via a trailer is a *binding responsibility* for > the change. A lot of tooling will cc the Reviewed-by addresses on follow-up > messages regarding code in this commit. If the address is bogus or doesn't > go to a developer, this is both wasteful and potentially frustrating.
Hi Konstantin! The goal here is to inform maintainers that sashiko has successfully reviewed the patch and there were no findings, otherwise maintainers have to go to the web site and check the status. I’m not attached to any specific form of it, I thought Reviewed-by is the most obvious form. And we use Reported-by: tags with various tooling for years. What do you think is the best form? I’ll pause sending reviewed-by tags until we have a discussion and agreement here. Thanks
