> I’ve also noticed things like the person who reviews a pull request being the one who has to merge it and essentially take responsibility for it, ... I worke

> I’ve also noticed things like the person who reviews a pull request being the one who has to merge it and essentially take responsibility for it, ... I worked on some teams that had that and it wasn't bad at all. In the end, what's on the main branch is everyone's shared responsibility (...was our thinking). It encourages real PR reviews, where the reviewer is paying attention to the changes, spend time on the review until they understand what is happening and why, and when they feel comfortable, they merge it as if the PR were their own. It doesn't sound efficient, but in the end it means you always have a backup person to turn to in case there is an issue, and we mainly only had "exotic" bugs. This only works with the right team and leadership. It was completely normal to say "yesterday morning I spent half the day reviewing that PR". OTOH, I was also on a team where PR approval means someone scrolled through your changes in 1 minute and didn't find anything blatantly wrong, go ahead and merge and hope for the best. This team broke the main branch in a significant way 2-3 times a week.