When "shit's on fire" usually multiple people are aware about it. In that case some of those should be able to jump in as reviewers and approve the changes with

When "shit's on fire" usually multiple people are aware about it. In that case some of those should be able to jump in as reviewers and approve the changes without too much drama. In my experience that works fairly well - but it obviously depends on the team. In such code reviews it can also help to point out > this is a hotfix for issue XYZ. A better fix / more tests / etc will follow" to make others aware why a change might not meet all best practices. And obviously if that is the case, the follow-up later on should really happen in order to avoid losing trust from reviewers.