Re: Stop false review statements
Jani Nikula <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | org.kernel.vger.workflows,dev.linux.lists.sashiko,dev.linux.lists.sashiko-reviews,org.kernel.vger.linux-devicetree,org.kernel.vger.linux-kernel |
|---|---|
| Organization | Intel Finland Oy - BIC 0357606-4 - c/o Alberga Business Park, 6 krs Bertel Jungin Aukio 5, 02600 Espoo, Finland |
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
On Sun, 17 May 2026, Jonathan Corbet <[email protected]> wrote: > That said, I was certainly considering *human* reviewers at the time, > and all of the people who agreed with the suggested policy were too. > Adding bots seems like a stretch to me. > > I can't speak for subsystems that require Reviewed-by tags on their > commits, but I'm not sure that their maintainers would accept an > automated review as satisfying that requirement. For the parts of the drm subsystem that have a committer/maintainer model, one of the requirements for pushing is that at least two people have been involved. Reviewed-by is one of the ways to record this is indeed the case. I can't speak for the entire subsystem either, but to me it was always about people, trust, and the community. We may add ways to record that an LLM has reviewed a patch, but I think the fundamental requirement that two human beings have been involved is going to remain. BR, Jani. -- Jani Nikula, Intel