Post

As an open-source maintainer, I'm not very bothered (yet) with PRs containing LLM-generated code. It's the ones with LLM-generated *descriptions* that bother me.

The description is what a reviewer reads first and what git blame shows a year later. A confident summary that does not match the diff is worse than none, because it primes the reader to approve the wrong thing.

It's weird to read an LLM generated reply on a post that complains about LLM generated content.

0 reposts0 likes