+1 I've found it ok as a general reviewer, best at low level nit picking than anything else. And everything it says has to be treated as a hint.
You can add custom instructions and I think that needs to be done to get the best from it to tell it what you want from a PR. You'd have to find other ASF projects' examples -things like what is a good test name, test assertion requirements, never to say "this is a security fix" in a security fix, and more. All the things you'd review for without actually looking at what a PR actually does. example https://github.com/apache/hadoop/pull/8594 On Thu, 16 Jul 2026 at 06:18, Gang Wu <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi all, > > I would like to discuss enabling ASF-managed GitHub Copilot code review for > Iceberg repositories, starting with iceberg-cpp as a small trial: > > https://github.com/apache/iceberg-cpp/pull/833 > > This would enable automatic Copilot review on non-draft PRs, using the ASF > `.asf.yaml` `github.copilot_code_review` setting. > > Apache Arrow recently enabled and tuned this feature: > https://github.com/apache/arrow/pull/50117 > > ASF Infra documents this as a supported `.asf.yaml` feature: > https://github.com/apache/infrastructure-asfyaml#copilot-code-review > > The `.asf.yaml` docs also say that before enabling such features, projects > should discuss the workflow/resource impact with the project team: > > https://github.com/apache/infrastructure-asfyaml#before-you-start-using-asfyaml > > I suggest starting with iceberg-cpp first as a trial, because reviewer > bandwidth > is limited there and Copilot may provide useful first-pass feedback. If it > works > well, other Iceberg repositories can adopt a similar setup later. > > Any concerns or objections? > > Thanks, > Gang >
