Re: [MAINTAINERS SUMMIT] Other LLM-related topics - tags, newcomers, etc

On Wed, 22 Jul 2026 17:26:30 -0700
Kees Cook <[email protected]> wrote:

> On July 22, 2026 10:48:40 AM PDT, Konstantin Ryabitsev <[email protected]> wrote:
> >On Tue, Jul 21, 2026 at 05:57:38PM -0700, Linus Torvalds wrote:  
> >> Or it can happen by looking at the patch itself, and trusting the
> >> contribution that way (and then the submitter grows his or her trust
> >> over time that way..
> >> 
> >> But basically, without trusting a submission some way, the submission
> >> shouldn't be accepted.  
> >
> >At the danger of introducing some kind of "karma system," how do we want to
> >build this trust? We already do end-to-end attestation, but a) not everyone
> >makes use of it, and b) it still hinges on name recognition.
> >
> >Do we want to dip our toes into some kind of "how many times have I accepted
> >patches from this person" automatic accounting system?  
> 
> This kind of reminds of Debian's maintainer "recency" reporting. "This
> person sent email to this or that list, committed over there, etc" as an
> easy to see a per-person overview/dashboard of activity. Maybe something
> like this for contributors would be good? It'd kind of be an extension of
> the existing tools LWN (and Greg?) use for attribution.

Couldn't this be easily gamed by something like what happened to xz?

Perhaps a dashboard is helpful, but I think it still comes down to having
some kind of personal connection.

-- Steve