> Switching to another tool felt like a huge project that was just not worth it. Linear took that to heart, and made switching super simple with a 2-way sync, keeping your legacy tool updated. I haven’t met an engineer who tried Linear and didn’t like it. Teams that switch to Linear see 2x more reported issues - engineers actually want to use the tool. More visibility => fewer meetings => happer engineers.

Yeah that's very clearly an ad. They didn't even try to be subtle lol.

Exactly what I thought and why I checked the comments , an lo and behold it's not just me..

No, it is an article that includes a short in-article ad for Linear. It's the text equivalent of when a YouTube video thanks some company for sponsoring the video and spends 30 seconds saying some good things about them before resuming whatever the video is about.

This is good. This is the kind of advertising that people here usually say that sites should be using if they need ads.

The author never suggested to eliminate code reviews entirely. Just to give individuals more autonomy, which is great in my book.

Communicating changes and communicating learning too! Every few years I rewatch one of my favorite videos on code reviews: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PJjmw9TRB7s.

Asking questions on code reviews is one of the most powerful tools to learn more about a codebase, and fostering a culture where junior devs feel empowered to ask questions is one of the best ways to help junior devs succeed.

I think there's probably a 5th one that's new-ish. Code isn't where the value is now that agentic tools can whip out a solution to just about anything in no time, so the commentary provides semantic grounding that allows you to navigate generated code easily.

It's kind of like some of the existing reasons, but there is a difference there.