LLMs make slop code faster than humans can meaningfully review. If you make LLMs the only review layer, then slop gets through because they have similar biases. Stop making slop.
Cool assumption. But pretty sure it’s not how things work at all but sounds great…
What actually happens is that you have a long list of multiple maintainers reviewing , and multiple branches for testing, and multiple layers of review too.
LLMs make slop code faster than humans can meaningfully review. If you make LLMs the only review layer, then slop gets through because they have similar biases. Stop making slop.
Cool assumption. But pretty sure it’s not how things work at all but sounds great…
What actually happens is that you have a long list of multiple maintainers reviewing , and multiple branches for testing, and multiple layers of review too.
https://www.kernel.org/doc/html/next/process/maintainers.html . See that long list of maintainers for a start.
The actual policy is that everything ends up getting reviewed by a human. If I post a patch, it doesn’t go straight to master
If it’s not being properly tested and maintained, it gets dropped irrespective of what it is (remember devfs?)
Also, I’m not sure about the kernel specifically, but on projects I submitted code to, they often wanted complex patches broken down if possible.
XZ Utils made it past all those checks with malicious code from a human.
If they’d been more careful with their tarball commits it probably would have made it into the final and commercial distros.
It made into Homebrew for instance.