Story
Stop sending me huge PRs; a rant
1 report
1 website
1 discussion
Latest report
Overview
Large pull requests (PRs) can complicate the review process, making it difficult for maintainers to manage code changes effectively. Smaller PRs are preferred for their ease of review, benefiting both the reviewer and the overall development workflow.
Summary from getsmall.xyz.
Reports
One report so far. Additional coverage will appear here when it is linked to this story.
getsmall.xyz
Stop sending me huge PRs; a rant
Read report →
Community reactions
Each reaction summarizes sampled comments from the linked discussion.
Hacker News · getsmall.xyz
Hacker News discussion ↗
Historical count: 5 · 5 saved in sample · Historical sample
Analysis ready
Read this discussion’s reaction
Based on 5 sampled comments from this thread. Analyzed 2026-08-15.
- Praise: Some users are finding LLMs effective at breaking down complex tasks into manageable workstreams, which streamlines the coding process and enhances productivity.
- Praise: One commenter highlights success with LLMs handling the tedious work of rewriting commit history, turning a soul-crushing task into a more manageable one.
- Praise: There's a suggestion to implement AI checks in CI that could help enforce reasonable PR sizes, potentially improving the review process and making it easier for developers.
- Concern: Several commenters express frustration that models struggle with creating small PRs efficiently, indicating a significant resource overhead and context limitations that hamper their usefulness.
- Concern: There's skepticism about the practical utility of LLMs for producing reviewable PRs, as many feel that they often miss the mark without careful prompting.
- Concern: One user warns against the tendency of some reviewers to demand excessive splitting of PRs, which can undermine the intent of the code and lead to unnecessary complications.