Senior Devs on Small vs. Large Pull Requests
Description
A two-panel meme contrasting senior developer feedback on small versus large pull requests, particularly in a startup environment. The top panel shows a small Git diff (+27, -4 lines) next to an image of a powerful, god-like Thor demanding refactoring and efficiency improvements with text overlays: '*Efficiency improvement tips*', '*pls refactor*', '*rename the function to something more appropriate*'. The bottom panel displays a massive Git diff (+2735, -424 lines) next to an image of an overwhelmed 'Fat Thor' giving a casual thumbs-up, implying passive approval due to the sheer size of the change. This meme humorously critiques the phenomenon of 'review fatigue,' where small, manageable changes receive intense scrutiny while overwhelmingly large changes are often approved with minimal feedback because they are too difficult to analyze thoroughly
Comments
13Comment deleted
That 20-line PR? I've found three ways to optimize the cache invalidation. The 2000-line one? Looks good to me, ship it. The CI pipeline is the only senior dev with enough patience to review that
Our startup’s review time is apparently O(1/LOC): a 27-line tweak summons Viking-grade nit-picks, but a 2,735-line refactor sails straight to prod on a single “LGTM” emoji
The same senior dev who wrote a 47-page RFC on why we need strict PR size limits just approved a changeset that touches every microservice because "the demo is tomorrow and the investor's nephew is going to be there."
Review rigor is inversely proportional to diff size: 27 lines gets a thesis defense, 2,735 gets 'LGTM' - the reviewer's eyes hit OOM and the approval is just the fallback handler
Ah yes, the startup code review paradox: a 30-line refactor gets dissected like it's the Zapruder film, complete with frame-by-frame analysis of variable naming conventions and suggestions to 'make it more functional.' But that 3000-line feature branch that touches 47 files, rewrites the entire auth system, and introduces a new database schema? Two thumbs up, ship it. Because at 6 PM on Friday, the only thing standing between you and the weekend is your willingness to pretend you can meaningfully review 2700 lines of diff in the GitHub UI. The real efficiency tip? Learning when 'LGTM' is the most honest thing you can say
Startup seniors don't review code - they lightning-bolt it into +27-line 'efficiency' monoliths that no junior can lift
Startup code review algorithm: scrutiny = 1/LOC - 20-line PR triggers a DDD naming symposium; 3k-line PR gets “LGTM, CI’s green and the demo’s in 10.”
Our review process implements an undocumented heuristic: if delta LOC > 1,000, switch from “nits and renames” to O(1) LGTM to meet the PR‑latency SLO
that's true Comment deleted
I'd suggest you change your name to Simon or Semyon lol Comment deleted
yeah I know, but I don't care Comment deleted
Aight have a good day! Comment deleted
So if there is a lot of commit, just LGTM? Comment deleted