But LLMs appear to be pretty good at making small commits with sensible commit messages, that greatly help to make sense of the whole PR.
Regarding large monolithic commits, how do you even know where to start reviewing in a large PR? Smaller commits at least give you some sense of ordering.
What I’m saying is that large commits shouldn’t be a thing without out of band discussions (formatting, design refactoring, features merging). With such knowledge, it’s easy to glance at the code and understand the implementation.
Not every project can afford this.
>With such knowledge, it’s easy to glance at the code and understand the implementation.
I really doubt that this is true for large, legacy code bases, where one is only familiar with a small part of the system.