Quick proposal: it's time to give up pull requests.
PRs were built for a world where a human wrote code slowly, thought hard about every line, and needed a review gate before merge. That world's gone. Now half our diffs are LLM-generated, shipped in minutes, and iterated on faster than any reviewer can meaningfully read them. We're running 2024 process on 2026 output in a world every month is the equivalent of a decade of the 90s or 00s.
Why it's broken:
- Reviewers are rubber-stamping 400-line (or 1600-line) AI diffs because there's no time to actually understand them
- The PR queue has become a bottleneck that punishes speed instead of enabling it
- "LGTM" now means "I trust the model" not "I read this code"
- We're optimizing for a review ritual, not for actual correctness or safety
What to do instead:
1. Replace pre-merge review with continuous, automated verification — tests, type checks, behavior diffs, and LLM-based reviewers that actually read every line (they can, we can't)
2. Merge to main by default, gate releases instead of commits — ship fast, catch issues at the release boundary with real monitoring
3. Reserve human review for architecture decisions and irreversible changes, not routine feature work
4. Treat code as disposable and regenerable — if an AI wrote it in 10 minutes, the fix is often just regenerating it, not painstakingly patching a diff
The goal isn't less rigor, it's rigor that matches the actual speed and nature of how code gets made now. PRs made sense when writing code was the bottleneck. It isn't anymore so maybe let's stop pretending our process should look the same?
But hey, throw a proposal this way I'm open to alternate solutions to the current mess.