The most controversial and highest-leverage constraint I’ve seen is a 100-line soft cap on PRs. Review effectiveness drops off a cliff above 200-400 lines. No matter how I look at the heaps and heaps of data, smaller PRs and clear PR descriptions are the only combination that consistently moves through review at a reasonable rate. This matters doubly for AI-generated contributions. The tools will happily produce 500 lines when 60 would do, and because agentic coding generates work asynchronously, those PRs tend to pile up in the queue without the natural back-and-forth that keeps human-authored changes in scope. The moment you start treating AI-authored PRs as a separate class with different standards, the lower standard wins. Treat every review the same regardless of who or what wrote it.
(s/def ::email string?)
，推荐阅读新收录的资料获取更多信息
Испания — Примера|27-й тур。关于这个话题，新收录的资料提供了深入分析
贵在精准，重在精准。我们创造的脱贫奇迹，充分证明了精准方略是减贫的制胜法宝。