On 10/10/25 5:29 AM, Daniel P. Berrangé wrote: > On Thu, Oct 09, 2025 at 02:19:15PM -0400, Cole Robinson via Devel wrote: >> Hi all, >> >> I used claude code to generate (unsubmitted) patches, before I realized >> libvirt had a policy rejecting AI generated submissions. >> >> The patches add domaincapabilities sound model output. If you've looked >> at code in this area, you know it's largely boilerplate. >> >> I'd describe the changes as: >> >> + Add the generic domain_capabilities plumbing >> + Add more QEMU_CAPS flags for all sound devices, copying device names >> already identified in qemu_command.c >> + Map qemu caps to domcaps in qemu_capabilities.c >> + Use domcaps for validation in qemu_validate.c >> + regenerate testsuite output >> >> (and those are basically shorthand for the instructions I gave to the LLM). >> >> There does not appear to be a single novel line in the whole series. >> >> But OK, for legal safety sake libvirt will not accept these patches. >> That's fair. >> >> But in a copyright sense am I tainted by looking at the generated code? > > Vendors of proprietary software may promote that POV, and I think it is > rather an extreme viewpoint. If you follow that to its conclusion then > every piece of code you've ever looked at "taints" your future output, > and you'll struggle to be comfortable writing anything new at all. > > IMHO reading existing code is simply part of the natural learning process. > Assuming you're not directly refering to the other code while you work, > anything new you write is your own creative work. If it happens to look > basically the same that is a reflection of the task having very limited > number of ways it can be implemented. > >> If I wanted to write the patches by hand they likely will end up looking >> identical, down to the character. >> >> Creates a weird scenario IMO. What to do? > > If you genuinely write the new patches by hand, with no direct reference > of the AI code while doing so, I see no significant problem to worry about. > Just throw away the AI generated code and write it yourself as normal and > submit. >
Ok sounds good, thanks for clarifying - Cole
