Simon, as co-creator of Django, what's your take on this story?

I think this line says everything:

> If you do not understand the ticket, if you do not understand the solution, or if you do not understand the feedback on your PR, then your use of LLM is hurting Django as a whole.

I love it. Sounds like good advice for submitting a PR to any project!

Why does it matter if the I understand the ticket and solution? THe LLLM writes the code not me. If you want to check the LLM understanding i'll be happy to copy and paste your gatekeeping questions to it.

Hey I thought you were a proponent of "no one needs to look at the code" ? dark factory, etc etc.

Just because I write about the dark factory stuff doesn't mean I'm a "proponent" of it. I think it's interesting and there's a lot we can learn from what they are trying, but I'm not yet convinced it's the right way to produce software.

The linked article makes a very good argument for why pasting the output of your LLM into a Django PR isn't valuable.

The simplest version: if that's all you are doing, why should the maintainers spend time considering your contribution as opposed to prompting the models themselves?

> if that's all you are doing, why should the maintainers spend time considering your contribution as opposed to prompting the models themselves?

Plenty of reasons: - Maybe the maintainers don't have enough credits to run the LLM themselves - Maybe the maintainers don't value fixing the issue which is why it sits in issue tracker - Maybe LLM user has a different model or harness that produces different outcomes - Maybe the LLM user runs the model over and over and gets lucky

Why reject a working solution?

Again, "if that's all you are doing".

You can contribute code that an LLM helped with if you do the extra work to review, verify and explain that code.

Don't put all of that burden on the maintainers who have to review it.

LLM are capable of "review, verify and explain", as much as they are "code".