How are you guys ensuring that the code that goes into production is high quality now that the time to review code is significantly greater than the time to generate it.

There is a huge asymmetry between who is generating the code and who is reviewing it, making the review process even more painful than it used to be.

Wondering whether if instead of reviewing PRs, we should instead move towards reviewing plans so that no code is generated before at least another person approves the plan.

Once the code is generated, the users who contributed to the plan can still review it but the fact that both participated in the plan should help reduce the asymmetry.

Feels like we need a way to collaborate and iterate on plans. Would love your thoughts on this.

In these times i would argue on probably getting the code reviewed by an ai agent which has been specifically trained on code quality, robustness and company or product specific code practices, that reduces the loan on manual reviewing by a large margin

In the last couple of companies I've worked in, I've felt both overwhelmed by PRs to review and disappointed by my teammates that were just rubber-stamping my PRs