User suggests that if a code review brings up refactors or enhancements independent of the current fix, these should be logged for a follow-up PR instead of blocking the current merge. This implies a need for a feature in a code review tool to facilitate this workflow.
Wish someone had told me this about code review etiquette ๐ The goal is shipping reliable code, not winning arguments. ๐ ๐๐ฌ ๐ ๐๐๐ฏ๐ข๐๐ฐ๐๐ซ: ๐๐จ'๐ฌ โ โพ Review the code within 24 hours โ blocking teammates kills productivity โพ Start with "What problem is this code solving?" โพ Look for security vulnerabilities first, then architecture, then style โพ Ask questions instead of making accusations ("What's the reason for...?" vs "This is wrong") โพ Suggest alternatives with code examples when possible โพ Acknowledge good patterns and clever solutions ๐๐จ๐ง'๐ญ๐ฌ โ โพ Donโt nitpick about style if there's an automated linter โพ Donโt rewrite the code in your preferred style โพ Never make it personal, critique the code, not the coder โพ Donโt approve without actually reviewing โพ Donโt block PRs for minor issues ๐๐ฌ ๐ ๐๐จ๐๐ ๐๐ฎ๐ญ๐ก๐จ๐ซ: ๐๐จ'๐ฌ โ โพ Keep PRs small (under 400 lines when possible) โพ Add context in PR description (screenshots for UI changes) โพ Self-review before requesting others โพ Break down large changes into smaller PRs โพ Respond to comments within one business day โพ Add tests for new code โพ Document non-obvious decisions ๐๐จ๐ง'๐ญ๐ฌ โ โพ Donโt take feedback personally โพ Donโt push back without explanation โพ Donโt mark conversations resolved without addressing them โพ Donโt submit PRs without testing locally โพ Donโt expect instant reviews for massive changes You can add more, based on your experience. ๐ ------ In case you missed my last post on the rise of Generative UI, covering MCP Apps, A2UI, and AG-UI and explained in a 14-page guide, itโs worth checking out. https://lnkd.in/gfJftnT7 #codereviews #softwaredevelopment #ai