RFC: The Binutils and LLM generated patches

[Nick Clifton]

Hi Paul,

> However, the details seem contradictory.  First it says that LLM content is not acceptable unless "de minimis".  Then it says that LLM content may be included provided the submission is tagged as such.  Which is it?  I think the opening paragraph says it has to be the first (no LLM) rather than the second (LLM if tagged).

A fair point.

My intent was that for patch submissions which are intended to acceptable
under the not-legally-significant exception should nevertheless still
indicate that they were LLM generated.  And how they were generated.

But I appreciate that the wording was not clear, so how about this
rewrite:

change:  "If a patch submission *does* contain LLM
           code then this must be clearly indicated"

to:  "When submitting a non-legally-significant LLM
       generated change, it is still necessary to
       clearly indicate the use of an LLM"

Cheers
   Nick