[onion2k]

I've also seen an increase in merged PRs, but it coincided with developers opening smaller PRs. In other words, AI made devs break work down more so they opened more PRs for the same work. That's still good, because smaller increments are better, but there' no actual increase in coding productivity, and it means the context-switching burden from review work went up e.g developers slowed down in a different area.

[regularfry]

I'm yet to be convinced that number of PRs as a productivity metric is any less flawed than counting lines of code.

I can believe - easily - that there's a real uplift here, but attaching any meaning to the 24% number at all is a massive overstep.

[gojkoa]

PRs measure effort, not outcome, so it’s a measure that their developers+ai spent 24% more effort than just devs previously (assuming the average work that went into a PR didn’t change, which is also a big assumption. maybe those PRs were smaller or more complex on average than before). so the uplift isn’t really tracked here. time to market, average cycle time per change, number of incidents per ticket released etc would be more meaningful metrics for uplift