On Tue Oct 13, 2026 at 9:38 AM -03, Laurent Pinchart wrote: > On Tue, Oct 13, 2026 at 01:19:40PM +0200, Jori Koolstra wrote: >> > Op 12-10-2026 17:42 CEST schreef Lorenzo Stoakes (ARM) <[email protected]>: >> > >> > +cc the participants from that thread FYI. The original patch is at [2]. >> >> Thanks, Lorenzo. >> >> > On Fri, Oct 09, 2026 at 12:05:06PM +0200, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote: >> > > On 09/10/2026 10:31, Sasha Levin wrote: >> > > > The Maintainers Summit reached consensus to deprecate the Assisted-by >> > > > tag. Remove the documentation requiring it. >> > > >> > > Please provide here some sort of arguments used in that summit >> > > consensus/discussion. This basically reverts/changes previous consensus >> > > [1], which is fine itself, but it lacks reasoning. >> > > >> > > [1] >> > > https://lore.kernel.org/workflows/2026070224-unholy-commode-cf45@gregkh/ >> > >> > Thanks for linking that! It is important to ack previous discussion on >> > this. Also LWN article is up now at [3]. >> > >> > I'm less bothered than you might think by this change. >> > >> > The tag's useful for push back on review, but the only long-term strategy >> > for >> > slop is to aggressively ignore it. >> > >> > Linus has made that clear that that's fine. >> > >> > What kills the project is having 1,000 slop submissions that 2 or 3 people >> > have >> > to do something with. >> > >> > The only long-term solution to that is to hit mark read 1,000 times :) >> >> There's a way to nuke drive-by authors and that is to require them to do >> some kind of "proof-of-effort." So you want to contribute to the kernel? >> Good, come to one of the OSS conferences, or LPC, or have some well-known >> maintainer vouch for you, or do the kernel mentorship program. The point >> is not that this cannot be gamed, but that the "gaming" in itself requires >> some kind of investment, like proof-of-work. >> >> We may miss the savant that for whatever reason cannot show up to a >> conference, > > We'll miss all the contributors who started small and put time and > effort in learning. I'm pretty sure that's a majority of the people on > the CC list, and it certainly includes myself. Making it much more > difficult for true hackers to contribute to the kernel, including by > requiring paying for travel to conferences, is the kind of policy that > would make me stop contributing to the kernel. > >> but Linux Foundation is already very supportive of funding people. > > How many people with very little history of kernel contributions has the > LF funded ? > >> And besides, >> Linus has already made it clear that we can expect of people to be able to >> grow >> into serious community members (which may include being able to effort time >> and/or >> money for LLM access.) > > Time won't buy you a ticket to LPC.
Also let's not forget the geographic problem. Many live very far away from the usual circuit of FOSS conferences to even consider attending. > >> This would solve most slop immediately, and we will know about LLM found bugs >> anyway from cooperation with Anthropic and just the maintainers using LLMs. >> >> > Sasha - maybe worth linking the LWN article now it's up in the commit >> > message >> > and adding a little more detail around the decision? >> > >> > Otherwise LGTM: >> > >> > Acked-by: Lorenzo Stoakes (ARM) <[email protected]> >> > >> > -- >> > Cheers, Lorenzo >> > >> > [2]:https://lore.kernel.org/all/[email protected]/ >> > [3]:https://lwn.net/Articles/1099594/
