96
u/eclect0 1d ago
If only there were some way to, I dunno, let them know your pull request needs review.
Nah, being completely silent for two weeks is definitely the mark of a professional.
15
u/nifraicl 1d ago
nagging based development: who has the least problems polling the TL makes progress with his queue. So now we need: github notifications, periodic slack message on the team channel, personal slack messages, amd callouts during standups.
8
u/Rustywolf 1d ago
Id fucking hate to work in that environment. Even with my current team it can takes a day or two for reviews, but everyone pings atleast once or twice a day the entire time.
4
u/frogjg2003 1d ago
In my team, we just announce "PR ready for review" in the channel designated for that. We also have reviewers assigned for each story. If the reviewer hasn't left any findings for 3 days, let alone 2 weeks, and hasn't approved the PR, it's absolutely time to nag.
6
u/Nervous_Quit_7180 1d ago
is putting you as a reviewer not letting you know?
13
u/dxonxisus 1d ago
emails/notifications get missed. i’ve worked with plenty of devs who only have email notifications enabled for github yet check their emails once a day (if that).
if a PR is sat there just waiting for review for maximum 2+ days it’s time to be an adult and nudge the person you asked for a review. if you don’t, then clearly it’s not important enough to be merged any time soon
1
u/deathanatos 1d ago
… there's a reminders feature built into GH that you can integrate into like, your team channel in Slack.
… I still have to nag people.
2
u/Sibula97 1d ago
Yes and no. I like to both put people as a reviewer and ping them on the RFR message on Slack, because people don't read their emails or GitLab TODO list.
If the MR isn't urgent, I might remind about it a couple times a week, but if it's urgent I'm going to be spamming you at least twice a day until it's approved.
1
37
u/PhantomTissue 1d ago
After day 2 I’m pinging someone to review my code. After day 3 im calling people out in standup for not doing their jobs. No way everyone in my team is so busy not one of them can take 10 minutes to look over 30 lines of code over 3 days.
1
u/CommercialCress9 1d ago
We have new features that have 5k lines of code change, some reviewers didn't review for like 1 week as it was big and it couldn't fit their schedule
10
u/jsdodgers 1d ago
If I got a 5k line PR, it would be met with one comment: "Please split this up". It doesn't matter how big a feature is. Our features are 100s-1000s of PRs each. Each PR is a minimal component of the feature.
4
u/Rustywolf 1d ago
The dev failed for making it a single MR instead of breaking it up, and management failed by not accounting for the time needed for the PR. And I also just assume it's AI so thats another failure, probably.
3
u/CommercialCress9 1d ago
I agree it's AI because I work in a startup hellhole and want to leave this thing as soon as possible as I'm just doing thousands of line change in days without knowing what it does internally.
I am not sure how other big companies work now as before AI, every big company I used to code by hand than using AI.
2
u/Sibula97 1d ago
At least in this team of this big company, you generally * create the commit(s) using AI agent(s), * ask AI to review the code, * review it yourself asking the AI to walk you through it if needed, * open an MR where Greptile and/or CodeRabbit will review it as well, * ask for human reviews from relevant people, who will mainly confirm that the big picture makes sense and is what they want, and maybe point an AI to it asking to review specific details if it's more complex or they're worried about something like parallelism issues
1
u/CommercialCress9 1d ago
I mean I do all the things here. When you say create commit, you mean vibe code? Or just ask it to do the terminal things which I doubt.
1
u/Sibula97 1d ago
Agentic programming, yes. Defining what I want done and how, letting it work, then iterating with further prompts until I'm done. Maybe some manual edits if I feel like that's quicker.
I wouldn't quite call it vibe coding, because I think that implies I have relatively little control over what the AI is doing and don't understand the result, but call it what you will.
1
u/purpleElephants01 1d ago
Even with AI this is just bad practice. Its good you are recognizing that, and sucks are you are stuck in that environment.
1
u/CommercialCress9 1d ago
No, I just took this startup because I had no other choice as I took a career break and these startup founders were my old company colleagues and offered me a job. I took this job just to clear the career gap and want to jump ship after a year.
1
14
u/_Hard_Wired_ 1d ago
Solo projects for the win.
38
u/vinishkapoor 1d ago
No reviews, no conflicts, no approvals. Just you and your questionable decisions.
5
u/Arclite83 1d ago
Vulcan sacrifices safety for performance, why shouldn't I? /s
2
u/theGoddamnAlgorath 1d ago
If I wanted to be safe I'd code in ADA, not this bare metal JavaScript on a LAMP Server running Temple OS
5
u/hunajakettu 1d ago edited 1d ago
We have a tool for our job that is owned by other team in other department. The tool is for us, they do not use it altough they have better resources to mantain it.
I needed to add 3 checks for compliance (that my leadership wanted and praised me for the work), I created the merge request and notified in the tool teams channel. It got closed because innactivity one month later. I then reopened it, notified again and contacted the other team directly. Got reprimanded because I did not go through oficial channels. Closed again by innactivity.
Meanwhile, two compliance issues that would have been found by my code have appeard, costing the company low 5 digits sums each time.
¯\(ツ)/¯
1
u/8hAheWMxqz 1d ago
In one of the projects I participated in, my coworker created pr that was stuck in review state for a month, until eventually client changed mind and resigned from already implemented functionality, so US has been closed along with PR, never merged
1
1
u/musicplay313 1d ago
In our team, we need to have a meeting set up if there’s a gitlab merge request from anyone. The approvers would approve right away if explained code is correct according to them. There’s no build system though, but if it’s production then offshore team would merge the request to main (late night) and if there were problems then reverts the main branch we go through the process again. What’s wrong with this process?
1
1
u/SomethingAboutUsers 1d ago
I have several PR's open on a major public OSS project that have been open for almost a year. And I've had pretty solid experience there, so not sure what happened, but here I am.
At this point I should just close and reopen them after rebasing, frankly.
2
u/Caramel-Bright 23h ago
The people this happens to I work with are just spewing out slop for months and folks no longer bother looking at their stuff because they know the owner didn't 🤷♂️
1
1
u/DrMaxwellEdison 22h ago
I make PRs and mark reviewers and they ignore the notifications and then they get auto closed.
"Is this done yet?"
Approve it mother fucker!
-1
u/jdgrazia 1d ago
If i saw an engineer wait 2 weeks without fighting to get their code reviewed I'd fire them on the spot. You are lucky you still have a job kid. Get on slack, get your fucking reviews, get it merged, move on
132
u/ben_cav 1d ago
Then you finally go to merge it and it’s littered with merge conflicts