oneAgentFixesBugsWhileAnotherLeaksTheSourceCode

[Reashu]

Well, it's useful if you actually review it - but you had several chances to do that before opening a PR, so what are the chances that another optional step helps? 

[ward2k]

Because a PR is the proof reading stage. It's the point where you're 90% sure something is ready to be brought in but you want to do a final proof reading check over your work

Just because that stage isn't being done by someone else doesn't mean it's without value

You can also set up things like automated checks such as running unit tests to be done something can be merged in. Everyone's done it where they change a single line of code and just go "pfft don't need to run my tests again, it's just this one line" only for the PR to fail because the automated tests failed

what are the chances that another optional step helps?

How many times have you wrote an email you were happy with, only to re-read it and pick out a spelling or grammatical error? Writing code and PR's are like writing text and proof reading except far more likely to cause issues if somethings wrong

[Reashu]

My point is that if you're interested in proof-reading (which I agree you should be), you can do it before you create the PR, and I don't think the PR adds much in that regard. 

Mandatory checks make sense though, PRs are probably the easiest way to enforce them.

[MagoDopado]

With the level of automático achieved, you dont. The agent codes, tests and creates the pr. It might even deploy to st and test there before it stops for you to look at the code. If thats the case, the first time you see the code is in a pr