My biggest issue with code reviews/PRs is that it runs counter to trunk-based development, of which I am a fan. I much prefer to go in and check people's small

My biggest issue with code reviews/PRs is that it runs counter to trunk-based development, of which I am a fan. I much prefer to go in and check people's small commits to master than look at a huge PR before it gets merged in, but it requires you (and the whole team) to be really diligent and do it on a daily basis, and when it comes to big features, you lose a lot of the context. OTOH, the amount of times I've been presented with a huge PR of an entire feature where the author begins by saying "sorry for the huge PR" and my predictable reply "I'm having trouble getting the whole picture here, but LGTM?" are countless, so I'm not sure that's better either. Not sure how to reconcile the two models into something great. As for the style of code review, I ask the team and adjust accordingly. I can be "big picture guy", or I can do that and simultaneously be "Mr. Nitpick" if people so wish (some people actually do, me included).