[oakejp12]

Are the junior programmers that you hire that good that you don't need training or commentary? I find I spend a lot of time reviewing MRs and leaving commentary. For instance, this past week, I had a junior apply the same business logic across classes instead of creating a class/service and injecting it as a dependency.

This, improper handling of exceptions, missed testing cases or no tests at all, incomplete types, a misunderstanding of a nuanced business case, etc. An automatic approval would leave the codebase in such a dire state.

[righthand]

I still pair with juniors, sometimes even the code review is a pairing session. When did I say I don’t need training or commentary? I’m talking about useless AI tools, not day to day work.

[oakejp12]

I'm mostly asking to see how I can adjust my workflow with juniors because I sometimes find myself drowning trying to maintain a decent codebase - not trying to be accusatory.

I generally use MRs as an opportunity to give feedback like how you'd get feedback on a set of math problem statements. I inferred from "rarely do I ever really leave commentary" that you're not using MRs as a training tool. How else do you train junior engineers?

For context, I work in the financial industry where mistakes are costly and users are hostile so the "accept & merge" workflow may not be for me.