[neogodless]

By perpetrator you mean the person postponing performing a code review?

Right? Right?!

Otherwise you place all burden on high performers to not only push PRs but babysit the rest of the team.

It's not an easy fix, especially with AI letting people cosplay as high performers.

[rightbyte]

> you place all burden on high performers

If their PRs don't get merged they don't perform. It is trivial to overload your coworkers with secondary tasks due to your "high performance".

[swiftcoder]

> If their PRs don't get merged they don't perform. It is trivial to overload your coworkers with secondary tasks due to your "high performance".

We're all aware that a huge portion of the busywork that makes a team successful is not actually reflected in their upwards-facing deliverables (increasing test coverage, improving infra, adopting new tools/methodologies, preemptive security patching, etc). Your actual high performers, if you have any, are doing all that stuff in addition to their regularly-scheduled duties.

If management weren't at least tacitly on board with this arrangement, your high performers would go work somewhere else. So my experience is that good managers don't tend to see this your way.

[rightbyte]

Yeah I agree. I was trying to makee the point that it is quite easy to make yourself blocked by others and it is a deep skill to get other stuff done while blocked anyway, like say cleanups and tests etc.

[swiftcoder]

> it is a deep skill to get other stuff done while blocked anyway, like say cleanups and tests etc.

Which themselves generate more PRs (or larger PRs)...

[Tade0]

To make myself clear:

Reviewers have comments which were not addressed by the PR author - author not allowed to do other work.

No such comments, especially no reviews - author can do other work.