I believe that automated reviews are going to be helpful to the project. I have seen them in use on some internal repositories and they are generally a useful additional line of defense for code quality. Thanks for starting up an experiment.
I would ask two things. First, please disclose in the reviews that they are automated. A simple disclaimer in the review like "This is an automated review, please ping me with feedback" would suffice. Second, I don't think automated reviews should approve PRs using GitHub's approval feature. That approval should be done by a human being. Gian On 2026/04/27 14:34:13 Frank Chen wrote: > Hi all, > > I wanted to let you know that I’m using Codex GPT-5.5 to run scheduled > reviews every weekday against open PRs in this repository on behalf of me. > > The intent is to provide an additional review pass focused on correctness > risks, regressions, compatibility issues, and missing edge cases, > and expedite the acceptance of PRs. > > Codex may post review comments directly on PRs when it finds something > actionable, or approve/comment when no issues are found. > Please treat these comments like any other automated or assisted review > feedback: useful when they identify a real issue, > but still subject to human verification and project maintainers’ final > decision. > > If this workflow causes noise or should follow a different convention for > this repo, please let me know. > > Thanks and regards, > Frank > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
