Re: [PATCH] Documentation: remove the requirement for LLM attribution

[Lorenzo Stoakes]

On Tue, Jul 07, 2026 at 01:03:51PM -0600, Jonathan Corbet wrote:
> Christian Brauner <brauner@xxxxxxxxxx> writes:
>
> >> Then someone can basically just merge the original patch I sent since
> >> everyone seems to agree on that front. And then the extension to include
> >> how the LLM was used can be discussed in a separate patch.
> >
> > https://patch.msgid.link/20260701-work-coding-assistants-v1-1-a20a94d1d606@xxxxxxxxxx
>
> I still have it around :)  I can apply it if that's truly the
> consensus... I'll confess to having not entirely kept up with the
> conversation over the holiday weekend, though, and needing to review
> things.
>
> If you object, do let me know.

I think we need the commit message to be a cleaned up a little :)

Also good to have it out there non-RFC so people know it's actually a contender
for merge.

So I think Christian should send a fresh non-RFC version of that with an updated
commit msg + with the people here cc'd, and I'm fine with that patch going in as
it is (I already gave a tag).

We can always follw up with the comment stuff later (which I consider _really_
important but one thing at a time).

>
> Thanks,
>
> jon

Cheers, Lorenzo