4 ms·

> If my boss forces me to review it, then I do so and start quietly applying for new jobs where my job isn't to spend 10x (or 100x) more time reviewing code tha

> If my boss forces me to review it, then I do so and start quietly applying for new jobs where my job isn't to spend 10x (or 100x) more time reviewing code than my coworkers did "writing" it. Another equally correct approach (given the circumstances of the organisation) is to get a different AISlopBot to do the review for you, so that you spend as much time reviewing as the person who submitted the PR did coding.

ffsm8 11mo ago
That only works if you're not personally responsible for the code you review, too.
- throwup238 11mo ago
  Just don’t give the AI agent an “approve_pr” tool. It can only comment or reject.
  - kortilla 11mo ago
    But then what? At the end it’s still on you to approve and you have no idea what is hiding in the code.
    - jjcob 11mo ago
      You don't approve it. You just slowly grind the submitter down with minor feedback. At some point they lose interest and after a year you can close the PR, or ask the submitter to open a new PR.
      - adastra22 11mo ago
        I hope you don’t actually do this to people.
        lukan 11mo ago
        If people do this to him? How else to react? The context here is lots of vibe coded garbage thrown at the reviewer.
        adastra22 11mo ago
        It takes less time and effort to close with an explanation why. It is going out of your way to waste the time of a contributor.
        lukan 11mo ago
        Context here is a corporate scenario where just closing is not possible.
        jjcob 11mo ago
        It works best if you don't reply immediately. I recommend successively increasing the response delay. Keep it short enough to make sure that they don't start bugging you on other channels, but long enough to make sure they have time to cool down and question if the continued effort is really worth it. As long as the response delay increases at least geometrically, there is a finite bound to the amount of work required to deal with a pull request that you will never merge.
        oarsinsync 11mo ago
        Tragically, when you are organisationally impaired from saying 'no', this is the only way (besides, you know, quitting and getting a new job). It's absolutely soul crushing when you're motivated to do a good job, but have a few colleagues around you that have differing priorities, and aren't empowered to do the right thing, even when management agrees with you.
        adastra22 11mo ago
        I am both an open source maintainer and contributor. This is absolutely despicable behavior. You are purposefully wasting the time of a contributor for no other reason than your own fear of saying “no.” If you’re not going to merge something, just ficking say so.
- Hamuko 11mo ago
  If they're okay with vibe-coded code, they should be fine with vibe-coded reviews too. You really only should be in a situation where you have more responsibility over your reviews than other people have for their code if you're in charge, and if you're in charge, just ban the practice.
  - stevula 11mo ago
    The problem is other people/teams making PRs to your code that you then have to maintain or fix later. It’s in your interest not to half-ass the review, creating an asymmetric amount of work for you vs them.
adastra22 11mo ago
Why waste anyone’s bandwidth on this? As maintainer of some open source projects, there are no circumstances in which I would accept a 9kLOC drive by contribution like this. State so and close it.
- oarsinsync 11mo ago
  > Why waste anyone’s bandwidth on this? The conditional was: If my boss forces me to review it > As maintainer of some open source projects, there are no circumstances in which... ...you would force yourself to do anything that you don't want to do. Your approach is absolutely correct for the organisational circumstances in which this might happen to you. There are other organisational circumstances where being the squeaky wheel, even when it's the right thing to do for the business, will be the wrong thing for you personally. It's valuable to identify when you're standing in front of a steamroller, and get out of the way.
  - rob74 11mo ago
    Ok, but then I would also prefer OP's approach: if things reach this level of dysfunction, you should really consider looking for another job...
  - charlieyu1 11mo ago
    Boss forced me? Good. I’ll take a look at the first 100-200 lines, find 3-5 critical or deadly errors, document it clearly and write to the boss how this vibe coding shit is wasting so much of my time
  - adastra22 11mo ago
    Have a backbone. I would seriously quit on the spot if requested to break my professional integrity with respect to open source development. I have been in this situation before too, so I’m not just saying it.
    - harimau777 11mo ago
      In this job market that's not an option for the majority of people.
khannn 11mo ago
Makes me want to write my own AI bot that brutally tears into any pr so I can reject it
beefnugs 11mo ago
Funny all the savings on employees, means they will have to hire specialized ai-code-reviewers now

ffsm8 11mo ago

That only works if you're not personally responsible for the code you review, too.

throwup238 11mo ago
Just don’t give the AI agent an “approve_pr” tool. It can only comment or reject.
- kortilla 11mo ago
  But then what? At the end it’s still on you to approve and you have no idea what is hiding in the code.
  - jjcob 11mo ago
    You don't approve it. You just slowly grind the submitter down with minor feedback. At some point they lose interest and after a year you can close the PR, or ask the submitter to open a new PR.
    - adastra22 11mo ago
      I hope you don’t actually do this to people.
      - lukan 11mo ago
        If people do this to him? How else to react? The context here is lots of vibe coded garbage thrown at the reviewer.
        adastra22 11mo ago
        It takes less time and effort to close with an explanation why. It is going out of your way to waste the time of a contributor.
        lukan 11mo ago
        Context here is a corporate scenario where just closing is not possible.
      - jjcob 11mo ago
        It works best if you don't reply immediately. I recommend successively increasing the response delay. Keep it short enough to make sure that they don't start bugging you on other channels, but long enough to make sure they have time to cool down and question if the continued effort is really worth it. As long as the response delay increases at least geometrically, there is a finite bound to the amount of work required to deal with a pull request that you will never merge.
        oarsinsync 11mo ago
        Tragically, when you are organisationally impaired from saying 'no', this is the only way (besides, you know, quitting and getting a new job). It's absolutely soul crushing when you're motivated to do a good job, but have a few colleagues around you that have differing priorities, and aren't empowered to do the right thing, even when management agrees with you.
        adastra22 11mo ago
        I am both an open source maintainer and contributor. This is absolutely despicable behavior. You are purposefully wasting the time of a contributor for no other reason than your own fear of saying “no.” If you’re not going to merge something, just ficking say so.
Hamuko 11mo ago
If they're okay with vibe-coded code, they should be fine with vibe-coded reviews too. You really only should be in a situation where you have more responsibility over your reviews than other people have for their code if you're in charge, and if you're in charge, just ban the practice.
- stevula 11mo ago
  The problem is other people/teams making PRs to your code that you then have to maintain or fix later. It’s in your interest not to half-ass the review, creating an asymmetric amount of work for you vs them.

adastra22 11mo ago

Why waste anyone’s bandwidth on this? As maintainer of some open source projects, there are no circumstances in which I would accept a 9kLOC drive by contribution like this. State so and close it.

oarsinsync 11mo ago
> Why waste anyone’s bandwidth on this? The conditional was: If my boss forces me to review it > As maintainer of some open source projects, there are no circumstances in which... ...you would force yourself to do anything that you don't want to do. Your approach is absolutely correct for the organisational circumstances in which this might happen to you. There are other organisational circumstances where being the squeaky wheel, even when it's the right thing to do for the business, will be the wrong thing for you personally. It's valuable to identify when you're standing in front of a steamroller, and get out of the way.
- rob74 11mo ago
  Ok, but then I would also prefer OP's approach: if things reach this level of dysfunction, you should really consider looking for another job...
- charlieyu1 11mo ago
  Boss forced me? Good. I’ll take a look at the first 100-200 lines, find 3-5 critical or deadly errors, document it clearly and write to the boss how this vibe coding shit is wasting so much of my time
- adastra22 11mo ago
  Have a backbone. I would seriously quit on the spot if requested to break my professional integrity with respect to open source development. I have been in this situation before too, so I’m not just saying it.
  - harimau777 11mo ago
    In this job market that's not an option for the majority of people.

khannn 11mo ago

Makes me want to write my own AI bot that brutally tears into any pr so I can reject it

beefnugs 11mo ago

Funny all the savings on employees, means they will have to hire specialized ai-code-reviewers now