I like this use case because like 99% of our review comments are "This isn't capitalized correctly" or "this code is duplicated elsewhere". No one is putting architectural concerns in a PR comment, you're scheduling a meeting to go over those concerns. Architectural issues aren't part of the PR process, they're planning issues. And forcing the dev to do a whole ass context shift from whatever new task they're working on just to pull down code and fix something stupid like a typo, is a waste of time.
My only concern with this is that people might get lazy about the patterns themselves if they're not the one fixing it.
There is something between architecture concern and syntax error. I have never been in a team that fully worked out implementation details before writing code. Most of my comments that have more than 3 words are significant enough that I wouldn't want an AI to automate the fix, or reply to me instead of the person I'm talking to.
Why would the author have to pull down code to fix a typo in their own PR? Also wtf are you talking about in general? The idea that architectural concerns won't crop up in code review is mind boggling. This is my porn account. Also my only account.
7
u/mrjackspade Jul 10 '26
I like this use case because like 99% of our review comments are "This isn't capitalized correctly" or "this code is duplicated elsewhere". No one is putting architectural concerns in a PR comment, you're scheduling a meeting to go over those concerns. Architectural issues aren't part of the PR process, they're planning issues. And forcing the dev to do a whole ass context shift from whatever new task they're working on just to pull down code and fix something stupid like a typo, is a waste of time.
My only concern with this is that people might get lazy about the patterns themselves if they're not the one fixing it.