alt Hacker News> After I “Requested changes” he’d get frustrated that I’d do that, and put all his changes in an already approved PR and sneak merge it in another PR.
This is outrageous regardless of AI. Clearly there are process and technical barriers that failed in order to even make this possible. How does one commit a huge chunk of new code to an approved PR and not trigger a re-review?
But more importantly, in what world does a human think it is okay to be sneaky like this? Being able to communicate and trust one another is essential to the large scale collaboration we participate in as professional engineers. Violating that trust erodes all ability to maintain an effective team.
Replies
It really demotivated me when this happened, I just kept seeing the PR open, but then I saw the changes applied before the PR was merged, which made me very confused. I then had an alert placed on every one of the updates made by Mike to make sure he didn't do this again. People were against "reset reviewers on commit" for "agility".
TFA wouldn’t blame ‘Mike’ but I definitely would. And ‘Mike’s Boss.
That’s not just a process error. At some point you just have to feed back to the right person that someone isn’t up to the task.
Yeah this never happened. This just sounds like an and everyone clapped moments, made to make a blog post. Most people on this planet are reasonable if not pushed.
Collaborative software development is a high-trust activity. It simply doesn't work in low-trust environment. This is not an issue with code review, it is an issue with maintaining a trust environment for collaboration.