No it is not. It depends on the codebase - if it is something relatively new, a proof of concept or something that is bound to change soon, there is no point in slowing the development down just because it is “too large to digest”.
If you’re just rubber-stamping in code reviews, why even have them in the first place in that case? They aren’t exactly providing you with any mileage at that point.
No it is not. It depends on the codebase - if it is something relatively new, a proof of concept or something that is bound to change soon, there is no point in slowing the development down just because it is “too large to digest”.
Then saying that you have looked through and reviewed the code would be lying. And that is unprofessional.
Is sitting down and understanding the code in the PR not an option?
I’m not sure what you are getting at.
Clearly they hate efficiencies.
If you’re just rubber-stamping in code reviews, why even have them in the first place in that case? They aren’t exactly providing you with any mileage at that point.
Because not all parts of the repo have this status. Some are stable, well tested and critical.