Hi thanks for this brilliant feature. It will really improve the product. However it needs a little bit more work before we can merge it into our main product.

1) The new feature does not follow the existing API guidelines found here: see examples an and b.

2) The new feature does not use our existing input validation and security checking code, see example.

Once the following points have been addressed we will be happy to integrate it.

All the best.

The ball is now in their court and the feature should come back better

This is a politics problem. Engineers were sending each other crap long before AI.

▲

blandflakes 9 hours ago | parent | next [-]

Engineers also wrote good code before AI. We don't get to pretend that the speed increase of AI only increases the output of quality code - it also allows engineers to send much more crap!

▲

parliament32 18 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

..so they copy/paste your message into Claude and send you back a +2000, -1500 version 3 minutes later. And now you get to go hunting for issues again.

	▲	sjducb 3 hours ago \| parent [-]
		If that happens then there’s an issue. In the past I’ve hopped on a call with them and where I’ve asked them to show me it running. When it falls over I say here are the things the system should do, send me a video of the new system doing all of them. The embarrassment usually shames them into actually checking that the code works. If it doesn’t then you might have to go to the senior stakeholder and quietly demonstrate that they said it works, but it does not actually work. You don’t want to get into a situation where “integrate” means write the feature while others get credit.