This is missing the actual story. If the team is high-trust, how high is the friction in creating the PR and hitting merge? Or is it a case where the team(s) is(are) high-trust but the CTO or CEO doesn’t share that trust and has imposed process? Or a new team member doesn’t share the pre-existing trust (lowering the trust from “high”)?
Pairing, early review, IntelliJ CodeWithMe, ... there are other collaboration/review techniques available, and the author sounds like she’s aware of them, so it sounds like a specific GH-based process has been imposed. Tooling for teams to do any other collaboration besides code review is lacking from my experience to be sure (please share your favorites!). Are the other options denied?
What exactly is the heavy process here? Color please.
This whole argument makes no sense. No one says you can only review branches when they're "done", many open source projects use RFCs, then WIP branches etc, no problem. The whole issue seems self-inflicted and the problem goes away when you remove the initial wrong assumptions.
Pairing, early review, IntelliJ CodeWithMe, ... there are other collaboration/review techniques available, and the author sounds like she’s aware of them, so it sounds like a specific GH-based process has been imposed. Tooling for teams to do any other collaboration besides code review is lacking from my experience to be sure (please share your favorites!). Are the other options denied?
What exactly is the heavy process here? Color please.