On Thu, 5 Jun 2025 at 11:52, Markus Armbruster <arm...@redhat.com> wrote: > +At times contributors may use or create scripts/tools to generate an initial > +boilerplate code template which is then filled in to produce the final patch. > +The output of such a tool would still be considered the "preferred format", > +since it is intended to be a foundation for further human authored changes. > +Such tools are acceptable to use, provided they follow a deterministic > process > +and there is clearly defined copyright and licensing for their output.
For the case where there's a one-off generation step and then the intent is purely human-authored changes from there onwards, why do we care whether the tool followed a deterministic process or not? As long as the copyright/licensing situation is clear and the submitter has checked tha the generation is what they want, what does determinism get us? As a trivial example, this rules out a hacky one-off python script that produces output by iterating through a hashtable if you forgot to add a "sort" to that ordering to make it deterministic. -- PMM
