There more things in a pull request other that just reviews. It can run a build pipeline and give feedback, provision test instances to run quick tests.
It can also be used to add context and have a conversation around the why's before merging. And yeah while it's not the main purpose we've caught a lot of bugs too just from the statically reviewing code.
I switched from Claude code to the GitHub copilot app recently. Since our repositories are hosted on GitHub I find the copilot app better integrated for the PR workflow with PR management available in the app. I don’t think I miss any of the features of Claude code I never thought I would make the switch but copilot upped the game.
Also it became very hard to convince management to keep both Claude code and GitHub Copilot enterprise licenses.
I am learning music. I used codex to create a native metronome app, a circle of fifths app, a practice journal app. I try to build a native app alternatives.
I have no plans of publishing them or making the open source, so it will not be a part of this metric. I believe others are doing this too.
I don’t think it’s bad on its own, but from my experience, the rollout can be messy and lock people out. Aadhaar in India had long registration queues, biometric issues, and banks making it mandatory. Even in the UK, the digital residency permit switch caused issues at border control.
It’s hard not to be overwhelmed by the Sagrada Família — it feels less like a building and more like a living organism stretching toward the sky. Makes Barcelona along all that it already offers a beautiful city to visit.
I also feel the tragedy behind its beauty. From what I've read, Gaudí dedicated later part of his life completely to it and he died poor and unrecognised, hit by a tram and mistaken for a beggar.
Not a fan of the new Safari design. I used to like it for its compact and minimalist look, but now the address bar and tab bar feel like they take up more space than they should.
In my experience, Page Objects sound neat in theory but end up as a leaky abstraction: they mix UI details with test logic, duplicate flows, and make even trivial UI changes ripple through dozens of files. What I’ve seen is indirection that hides test intent and bloats maintenance.
I also find them very developer-centric — testers get forced into upfront design work that doesn’t fit how they naturally test, and many struggle with it. I’ve had better results by expressing behavior directly and keeping UI concerns thin, instead of using a wrapper around page structure.
Part of this is on developers. Refactoring is fine, but too often it turns into yak-shaving and nothing ships. The approach usually works: refactor in small steps and tie it to a feature so it’s testable and adds value.
It can also be used to add context and have a conversation around the why's before merging. And yeah while it's not the main purpose we've caught a lot of bugs too just from the statically reviewing code.