|
|
|
|
|
|
by jeremyjh
5 days ago
|
|
|
It required reading comprehension skills. It is simply a fact that most commits are small - that is the nature of that kind of project. I looked at the commit history. It still takes a lot of work and it is valuable, but it has very different review requirements. |
|
|
Ok, how come your little comprehension examination didn’t grapple with the main point: that they said they could not have made the changes they merged in themselves? Surely pointing out that the commits were small cuts AGAINST your whole argument. For a more complex project where vibe slop might not be appropriate (again, wild thing to say), the potential input from outside is more valuable, not less.