My pet peeve is people who use LLMs to generate code, never check whether it works, and then submit a PR.

As if open-source maintainers don't have enough chores.

I await the first LLM generated PR to my JS canvas library with eager anticipation.

I can't wait to ask them if they've run the PR branch against all of the test demos, so they can prove that the PR doesn't break existing functionality. Currently there's just under 200 test demos, each of which needs to be tested manually (because: hell = canvas library + animation) across the three main browsers to make sure nothing breaks. Bonus points for going the extra mile for testing on mobile device browsers.

Over the last 6 months this has been my experience with new engineers at work, absolutely awful. I wish people didn't feel the need to throw out SDLC once the LLMs came along.

It's not rare for me to ask if they tested it. They can lie, but if they say they did and it crashes on me right when I start it, then I may never trust this contributor ever again.

Also I don't hesitate to be frank in my review, it's okay to say "I won't merge your feature because I don't think I can maintain that, but you're free to keep your fork". Or "I can merge it if you change this and this", but in that case I need to actually merge if they do what I asked for.