In these times i would argue on probably getting the code reviewed by an ai agent which has been specifically trained on code quality, robustness and company or product specific code practices, that reduces the loan on manual reviewing by a large margin
that definitely helps but i'm wondering if that whole process (via an agent or via a human teammate) should be performed at the plan stage instead of the review stage. this should reduce the back and forth after the pr is opened (avoiding the delays and costs of running the CI several times)
In the last couple of companies I've worked in, I've felt both overwhelmed by PRs to review and disappointed by my teammates that were just rubber-stamping my PRs
In these times i would argue on probably getting the code reviewed by an ai agent which has been specifically trained on code quality, robustness and company or product specific code practices, that reduces the loan on manual reviewing by a large margin
that definitely helps but i'm wondering if that whole process (via an agent or via a human teammate) should be performed at the plan stage instead of the review stage. this should reduce the back and forth after the pr is opened (avoiding the delays and costs of running the CI several times)
In the last couple of companies I've worked in, I've felt both overwhelmed by PRs to review and disappointed by my teammates that were just rubber-stamping my PRs
wondering if the problem is the teammates rubber-stamping or the tool/workflow being outdated