I agree in general that there needs to be at least some level of review (typos, etc.), not necesssarily to catch big but subtle issues.

On the other hand, I've had it where small (single character!) PRs have to wait for several days because I need to keep bothering my team to review them. But this seems like a problem that solvable organizationally somehow (not sure how?) rather than by eliminating an important part of the process.

Yeah, I know that I tend to avoid the broken stuff in my own code and/or only test it along happy paths because I know how it's supposed to work. I can work around that, sure, but IME there's a certain kind of blindness to things that comes with familiarity - a fresh set of eyes is a good way to mitigate that.

It’s not about trust.

It’s about risk management, communication and teamwork. Development at scale is a team sport.

There’s a difference and it’s simple starting with…

- Does my team understand this change?

- Is there anything I missed that would have a negative impact on others?