Thread

1. zzzeek · 1791054135 · focus · HN ↗

   banning AI from PRs because you're swamped with too many low quality PRs, definitely. We pretty much are doing this with SQLAlchemy. If I'm going to have a small fix or improvement coded by an LLM (which I do all the time), I want to prompt the LLM directly, rather than having someone trying to pad their resume forward my communications onto their LLM via PRs. What's the point of that?

   1. baq · 1791057685 · focus · HN ↗

      rejecting low quality ones should be the norm regardless of whether an AI or a human wrote them. the question is what would happen if you were swamped with high quality PRs? what will happen once you are? (that's probably a 2027 question!)

      1. grumbel · 1791062065 · focus · HN ↗

         I'd still reject them. It's the bug reports and feature requests that are valuable. When you have an AI yourself, there is little point in having somebody else let their AI implement them, that just creates a lot of risks and unknowns for no benefit.

Unofficial Hacker News client; not affiliated with Y Combinator.