I have no problem with LLM generated PRs in my repo, I merged one the other day and it was very helpful. What I do have a problem with is two things: 0. Make t

I have no problem with LLM generated PRs in my repo, I merged one the other day and it was very helpful. What I do have a problem with is two things: 0. Make the PR reviewable. That means small, logically distinct PRs, not one huge PR with a bunch of stuff in it. 1. You are 100% completely responsible for the code. I gave the maintainer some feedback on how to add a few lines of comments, they gave that to the LLM, which changed an unrelated path in a pre-commit hook. That's unacceptable, I don't want to babysit your LLM because you can't be bothered to review its output. 2. If I talk to you, I expect you to talk to me. I asked the author a question with a simple answer, and got four pages of LLM ELI5. If I wanted to read four pages of text, I'd open Anna Karenina. You might notice that the above requirements don't have anything to do with LLMs. I expect them whether a person wrote the PR or an LLM. It's basic etiquette. I don't think OSS contributors suddenly went crazy and started being rude, but I do think that LLMs allow people who have never contributed to OSS before to start doing it, before they know the rules of OSS etiquette. I'm not sure that's a net positive, but I hope we'll all learn.