docs: drop PR-count split from PM report#184
Merged
Merged
Conversation
PR counts conflate a typo fix with an architectural refactor. Reframe around the review gate — all 127 PRs reviewed by the other team member before merge — which is the actually load-bearing claim for a PM report.
tyrahappy
approved these changes
Apr 20, 2026
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Pull request overview
Updates the project-management report to emphasize enforced cross-review discipline (via branch protection) and remove the per-person PR split that could be misleading in a PM context.
Changes:
- Replaces the “PR split” line with a “Review discipline” statement referencing branch protection and total merged PR count.
| | Apr 18–20 | Business-case doc, deck iterations, Campaign → Script rename across deck/frontend/backend, lessons-series refresh | M5-distributed-patterns experiments (fan-out, stragglers, idempotency), experiment overview, PDF export, M5-4 rerun | Final submission package | | ||
|
|
||
| **PR split:** Sam 77 (61%), Jess 50 (39%). Every PR reviewed by the other. | ||
| **Review discipline:** all 127 merged PRs passed through code review by the other team member before merging — enforced by branch protection on `main` (see below). |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This line states that all 127 merged PRs passed through code review, but later in the same document the “One PR, one fix” / branch-protection bullet refers to 112 PRs/112 merged PRs. Please reconcile these counts (either update the later 112 references to 127, or explain what subset 112 refers to) so the report is internally consistent.
Suggested change
| **Review discipline:** all 127 merged PRs passed through code review by the other team member before merging — enforced by branch protection on `main` (see below). | |
| **Review discipline:** all 127 merged PRs passed through code review by the other team member before merging. The **112 merged PRs** referenced later in the “One PR, one fix” / branch-protection bullet are the subset counted in that branch-protection audit on `main` (see below). |
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Summary
Follow-up to PR #183. The PM report still has a line — 'PR split: Sam 77 (61%), Jess 50 (39%). Every PR reviewed by the other.' — that conflates a typo fix with an architectural refactor and undercuts the 'every PR reviewed' point that's actually load-bearing for a team PM report.
Change
One-line replacement on the PM report:
Keeps the total (127, verifiable) and drops the individual split.
Test plan
docs/homework/project-management-report.mdreads the new 'Review discipline' framing🤖 Generated with Claude Code