July 29, 2026

Pull request or pull the plug?

GitHub is the wrong shape for this new world

Coders are asking if GitHub still fits a world where AI writes the software too

TLDR: A new essay says GitHub’s human-paced workflow may not work in a world where AI can write software fast. Commenters were split: some said AI already fits into today’s setup just fine, while others argued the real shake-up is that teams — not GitHub — may be the thing getting replaced.

The big claim in this post is pure workplace drama: the old way of building software may no longer fit the new AI-fueled chaos. The writer argues that GitHub — the site many teams use to store code, review changes, and approve updates — was built for humans moving at human speed. Now that AI tools can spit out features in minutes, the old routine of “make a change, open a review, wait for tests, wait for approvals” is starting to look less like a smooth assembly line and more like a traffic jam.

But the comments? That’s where the real fight breaks out. One camp basically shrugged and said, “What crisis?” User philips stole the show by saying they made a bot account and treated it like a turbocharged teammate — and it was… fine. Not scary, not awkward, just another contributor sending in changes. That’s a spicy plot twist for anyone predicting total AI disaster.

Then the skeptics arrived. cortesoft flat-out questioned the whole premise, asking what exactly is wrong besides slow testing. In other words: is GitHub broken, or are people just impatient? Meanwhile gerdesj went full old-school rebel, arguing GitHub already made coding too centralized and polished, joking that it turned messy, freewheeling software culture into something more like a corporate garden with rules. And ChicagoDave brought the coldest take of all: maybe the real change isn’t GitHub — maybe it’s that big coding teams themselves are becoming optional. So yes, the article asked whether GitHub is the wrong shape. The crowd answered with a louder question: is the tool the problem, or is the whole job changing underneath it?

Key Points

  • The article argues that GitHub-style workflows are mismatched with how software is increasingly built today.
  • It says longstanding bottlenecks such as source control, CI/CD, code review, and deployments now constrain higher development velocity.
  • The article states that code contribution has expanded beyond engineering teams to functions such as sales, support, and marketing.
  • It identifies unresolved questions around code ownership, trust, review, interoperability, and the cost-quality tradeoff of token usage.
  • It describes GitHub, GitLab, and Bitbucket as collaboration tools built around branches and pull requests, and says newer AI agents are pushing beyond the assumptions of that model.

Hottest takes

"it just kind of worked" — philips
"I don't feel like this article really answers the question of why this is the wrong shape" — cortesoft
"GitHub is fine. The thing that’s changed is that we’re unlikely to need large teams anymore" — ChicagoDave
Made with <3 by @siedrix and @shesho from CDMX. Powered by Forge&Hive.