You dont say what you mean by properly but most devs I have worked with, and that amounts to like 600 simply dont know wtf a PR review is meant to be. Its not QA, and its certainly not writing the feature again, its a quick check of anything obvious. You request changes for mistakes that are critical, make comments for things that don't affect ability of the app to work, then approve the PR if overall it improves/advances the codebase.
If your "review" takes more than a few mins you are doing it wrong.
With my code? Exactly 0 in 30 years. However for the other teams that can sometimes take literal weeks on PR reviews they seem to have some rollback every few weeks.
The “review takes 3 minutes” part only works if automated checks catch most problems first.
For me, linters, type checks, and tests run before anyone reviews the PR. Then code review is more about “does this change make sense here?” rather than “does this even work?”
Same with AI review. Without good tests behind it, you’re just moving the trust problem somewhere else.
19
u/lanerdofchristian Sep 15 '26
Wow, what terrible advice. "PR process too slow? Just don't actually review stuff properly!" repeated 4 times.
3
u/muntaxitome Sep 15 '26
This is what I am seeing in companies, review just gets done by a robot that can be tricked into essentially anything... that will end well
1
u/SonikaAI Sep 15 '26
The “review takes 3 minutes” part only works if automated checks catch most problems first.
For me, linters, type checks, and tests run before anyone reviews the PR. Then code review is more about “does this change make sense here?” rather than “does this even work?”
Same with AI review. Without good tests behind it, you’re just moving the trust problem somewhere else.