I'm an OSS maintainer and to me it's not just about the review itself. Being greeted by a wall of text for every little small thing is counter-productive. I hate going through 2 pages of text for each PR. It usually shouldn't take more than a couple of sentences if you understand the issue and the solution.

But most important for me: lots of time the PR just adds even more code, although other options do exist (ie sometimes REMOVING some code). You have to know the codebase well in order to find those objectively better solutions.

▲

ahartmetz a day ago | parent | next [-]

I've seen it. Walls of text with stereotypically worded non-summaries that just repeat all of the code in words, mutating values all over the place instead of the obvious canonical one place that touches related values...

Yeah you can use LLMs, but don't let me notice it from the quality of the output.

I've noticed that LLMs seem to be especially bad at things relating to space, position and movement. I guess they have to synthesize that part of human intelligence entirely, it's not in the words.

▲

a day ago | parent | prev | next [-]

[deleted]

▲

othmanosx 17 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

Give https://pyor.review a shot if you’re struggling with PR reviews on github.

▲

embedding-shape 16 hours ago | parent [-]

Or, the SaaS-less approach, if a issue description is too messy/long, close it with "Please reopen with proper and concise description focusing on the issue" then lock it. Eventually people catch up and stop with the slop, just like in real life.

But you have to be able to say "No ...", rather than just slapping another subscription on top of an already broken workflow.

▲

othmanosx 5 hours ago | parent [-]

If you're maintaining OSS, that's understandable, and you're free to say no, but in the corporate world, that's not realistic, AI is here to stay, if they don't harness it they would just be left behind. even if the AI gets good and stops writing sloppy stuff, it's still gonna write a lot of stuff, and you're gonna review it anyway, and take responsibility and ownership, and it's still gonna take you more time, because the bottleneck is now reviewing and understanding the code.

I agree that the workflow is broken, but only on the reviewing side, AI is a tool we use to make products just like any other we used in the past, punch cards, machine code, assembly, ...etc. AI is just the new tool that sits on top of the code as the next level, no one codes with punch cards, no one writes machine code anymore, we used to write the compiled language and don't care about how it's compiled or turned into machine code, same with AI, although it's not there yet and still requires babysitting by engineers, but that's our new job now, and we need to learn how to use it and make our lifes easier.

	▲	embedding-shape 3 hours ago \| parent [-]
		> but in the corporate world Sure, but that's irrelevant when someone says "I'm an OSS maintainer" and the context is explicitly about reviewing code submitted by others in a FOSS context, where you can say "No" and don't need any SaaS in order to do so.