Hacker News Reader

Comment by Thaxll | Hacker News Reader

There are people pushing to master without review? I mean it's a common thing?

This new to me as well. I am very curious what situations people are in where they don't/can't wait for a PR into master.

If you reading this do this, I'd be interested in hearing what the benefit of pushing to master is for you. Is it purely for velocity? And if so why is velocity that important?

Coming back to my comment having finished the article in full.

I wonder how the author's code base will develop using a weekly reflection on the code committed instead of PRs. I'm not sure how well their process will handle someone's poor design decisions. My experience has been that poor decisions tend to stay in code once they are there, and especially as more things become dependent on those decisions. Not that reviews will catch everything, but that second set of eyes can go a long way.

Yes, there are! Familiar with this approach, pretty common with greenfield development.

After causing a few outages and issues that you have to hear about, one learns fairly quickly not to write code that needs endless PR reviews.

I'm curious to know how does your team avoid shooting itself in the foot with unreviewed code? As in, is there some process that keeps unmaintainable elements from sneaking in?

Trust people to know what they're doing? A lot of PR reviews tend to devolve into almost anything but solving the issue at hand.

Fair enough. My experience with reviews has been they are quick quality checks, and at least for teams I have been on, were beneficial. I can see how they could become more of a ritual process than a beneficial one though, especially after seeing some other comments in the thread.

Surprising. We do a PR and review for nearly every block of work we commit. Most pass without comment. The ones that have comments usually have good suggestions, or actually catch an error.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com