The author of the PR is a long time nodejs contributor & conference speaker. He explicitly claims that `I've reviewed all changes myself.`.

In the end it's a question if you trust him to submit a useful, well-reviewed PR. Doesn't matter if it was created using AI or not.

Such a PR should be rejected simply because of the shear size of it, regardless of AI use. Seriously, who submits a 19k line PR? Just make many small ones.

On the other hand, I haven’t and I believe many of us, have never paid node any money so it feels weird to dictate their approach.

@indutny explains their views in that thread.

A person, who posts slop for whatever reason, or runs bots that post slop, will simply ignore them.

An honest person, who cares about the quality of their contribution and genuinely wants to improve the project will be more limited in the choice of tools to do so.

So, this policy only serves to limit honest contributors, while doing absolutely nothing to stop spammers/slopposters.

Stop treating this like it's going to go away. We need actual solutions for the FOSS community that make reviewing AI assisted work tractable.