3 ms·
You can have perfectly fine, high quality, peer reviewed code without PRs. Only if some regulation requires sign offs from e.g.other depts. PRs are inevitable.
by berkes 5y ago
You can have perfectly fine, high quality, peer reviewed code without PRs.
Only if some regulation requires sign offs from e.g.other depts. PRs are inevitable. In all other situations they are at best an inneficient workflow and at worst a Kafkaesque circus.
Peer programming, daily checkups, a rock solid CI, and, above all, trust in the professionalism of your team are some ingredients for high quality, high throughput software development.
This is not an opinion. It's a scientifically proven fact. As laid out in the book Accellarate.
- jseban 5y ago> Peer programming, daily checkups, a rock solid CI, and, above all, trust in the professionalism of your team are some ingredients for high quality, high throughput software development. Absolutely agree, the collaboration should happen sooner in the process, and I would add that the team should probably also have made at least a high level proposed solution together before the work even started.
- hiptobecubic 5y agoPeer programming is just code review again, except now you're only allowed to write when two people are available.
- berkes 5y agoIndeed. The point was not that "review" is bad, or should be avoided. But that a Pull-Request is a poor way to do that review. Reviewing is crucial, IMO.