carloea2 commented on PR #4268: URL: https://github.com/apache/texera/pull/4268#issuecomment-4435830678
I want to share some feedback about the review process for apache/texera. This is not meant to reopen the PR or attack anyone personally, but I do think the experience raised some process concerns that I want to share. This PR was +1,737 / -19. Around the same time, larger PRs were merged, for example: 1. apache/texera#4540: +2,476 / -10 2. apache/texera#4331: +1,888 / -384 3. apache/texera#4495: +9,473 / -2,774 Because of that, I found it difficult to understand/trust how PR size and review expectations are being applied consistently. I also do not think Copilot reviews should carry much weight without human validation. In this PR, Copilot hallucinated at least twice. AI review can be useful as an extra signal, but it should not become a substitute for timely human review, especially when a PR is being delayed or blocked. More generally, my experience contributing has become increasingly time-consuming and less pleasant. Review cycles feel longer, there are idle periods, and it is not always clear what is expected from the contributor. That makes the process frustrating, especially when feedback comes slowly or mainly from automated tools. I also want to point out that test-related PRs should be reviewed with the same seriousness as other PRs. I do not agree with the idea that test PRs are lower-risk or that weaker review is acceptable because they are “only tests.” Poor tests can still create maintenance burden, false confidence, and long-term quality issues. If reviewers have the right to reject a PR for quality reasons, then contributors should also be able to expect timely, consistent, and meaningful human review. Otherwise, the process becomes unbalanced: contributors are expected to respond carefully to every comment, while automated review can generate unreliable or redundant feedback without the same level of accountability. I am sharing this as my personal perspective based on this PR and nearby examples. I am not asking everyone to agree with me and I do not intend to defend this perspective, but I do think the review process could be more consistent, transparent, and respectful of contributor time. -- This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service. To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the URL above to go to the specific comment. To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at: [email protected]
