[flagged]

GP is referring to the submission, in case that wasn't obvious. It's opining as to possible reasons, given the author is one of the people who had a feature reverted.

> Did someone not understand what went in?

Unlikely, from the context.

> Might someone have offloaded their thinking to some external tool?

No, according to the author, since the features predate most current LLM assisted coding.

> Did people stop caring?

I'm not sure what this means. Presumably things were reverted because people cared enough to make sure it was good quality before being released.

> Did someone not plan or design a feature in full?

An admitted possibility

> Were the timelines unrealistic?

Depending on what you mean, that may be correct according to the article, but I suspect not in the way you mean.

> Maybe with so many reverts timelines should be revised?

It sounds like there was a very large increase in load in some of the people that would commonly review during this time period, and that may or may not continue to happen to a greater or lesser degree in the future, it depends on how LLMs advance in finding bugs and if there are other large waved of bugs reported.

Huh?