My thoughts exactly. I'm not merging a bunch of untested code that replaces a bunch of working code, no matter how bad the old code was! That seems like a reci

My thoughts exactly. I'm not merging a bunch of untested code that replaces a bunch of working code, no matter how bad the old code was! That seems like a recipe for a production nightmare. The fact that this situation even arose in the first place would be bad news. 1. Did the other dev just refactor the code on a Red Bull bender one night on his own time? Hopefully this refactor work is something we would have discussed ahead of time. Hopefully I wouldn't have to even tell them that the expected coverage for a big refactor like this would be darn close to 100%. 2. I'd phrase this rejection in a positive way. I'd be excited about the refactor and testability and I'd let the other dev know that I appreciated the work and was looking forward to getting it to 100%, testing and merging it (I realize the example in the story was purely hypothetical and this didn't actually happen. :P)