Some years ago, I started doing self code-reviews for most of my PRs. It allows in-line elaborations of the changes (that are *not* better put as code comments), and it sometimes reveals little accidents / things I overlooked and need to follow-up on. It helps other human reviewers understand / trust what was done, which ultimately leads to better / more efficient peer review. I review lots of PRs, and I appreciate this a lot when I see it! It seems more common now.
In the current age of AI with total/mixed/unknown provenance of a PR, I think this practice is even more important. It helps demonstrate to other reviewers that the human author/contributor has taken responsibility for what they are presenting for anything non-trivial by reviewing it themselves. When I don't see a self review, and I see some questionable things, I begin to lose trust and wonder "did you even look at this" and feel my reviewing time was taken for granted / wasted. This may not have presented a problem here yet; I'm not motivated by an experience in this community. Well not recently, anyway. Nonetheless, given the benefits of self code reviews, I'd like to edit our PR template to *recommend* that a self-review be done immediately afterwards, particualrly for anything non-obvious. Any thoughts on this? ~ David Smiley Apache Lucene/Solr Search Developer http://www.linkedin.com/in/davidwsmiley
