The exception process is a second thought in QEMU's policy for AI-generated content. It is not really possible to understand how people want to use these tools without formalizing it a bit more and encouraging people to request exceptions if they see a good use for AI-generated content.
Note that right now, in my opinion, the exception process remains infeasible, because there is no agreement on how to "demonstrate clarity of the license and copyright status for the tool's output". This will be sorted out separately. What is missing: do we want a formal way to identify commits for which an exception to the AI policy was granted? The common way to do so seems to be "Generated-by" or "Assisted-by" but I don't want to turn commit message into an ad space. I would lean more towards something like AI-exception-granted-by: Mary Maintainer <mary.maintai...@mycorp.test> but at the same time I don't want to invent something just for QEMU. Signed-off-by: Paolo Bonzini <pbonz...@redhat.com> --- docs/devel/code-provenance.rst | 22 ++++++++++++---------- 1 file changed, 12 insertions(+), 10 deletions(-) diff --git a/docs/devel/code-provenance.rst b/docs/devel/code-provenance.rst index dba99a26f64..d435ab145cf 100644 --- a/docs/devel/code-provenance.rst +++ b/docs/devel/code-provenance.rst @@ -292,7 +292,8 @@ TL;DR: **Current QEMU project policy is to DECLINE any contributions which are believed to include or derive from AI generated content. This includes - ChatGPT, Claude, Copilot, Llama and similar tools.** + ChatGPT, Claude, Copilot, Llama and similar tools. Exceptions may be + requested on a case-by-case basis.** **This policy does not apply to other uses of AI, such as researching APIs or algorithms, static analysis, or debugging, provided their output is not @@ -322,18 +323,19 @@ How contributors could comply with DCO terms (b) or (c) for the output of AI content generators commonly available today is unclear. The QEMU project is not willing or able to accept the legal risks of non-compliance. -The QEMU project thus requires that contributors refrain from using AI content -generators on patches intended to be submitted to the project, and will -decline any contribution if use of AI is either known or suspected. +The QEMU project requires contributors to refrain from using AI content +generators without going through an exception request process. +AI-generated code will only be included in the project after the +exception request has been evaluated by the QEMU project. To be +granted an exception, a contributor will need to demonstrate clarity of +the license and copyright status for the tool's output in relation to its +training model and code, to the satisfaction of the project maintainers. +Maintainers are not allow to grant an exception on their own patch +submissions. Examples of tools impacted by this policy includes GitHub's CoPilot, OpenAI's ChatGPT, Anthropic's Claude, and Meta's Code Llama, and code/content generation agents which are built on top of such tools. - This policy may evolve as AI tools mature and the legal situation is -clarifed. In the meanwhile, requests for exceptions to this policy will be -evaluated by the QEMU project on a case by case basis. To be granted an -exception, a contributor will need to demonstrate clarity of the license and -copyright status for the tool's output in relation to its training model and -code, to the satisfaction of the project maintainers. +clarified. -- 2.51.0
