Onboarding Repositories to Sema for Code Review Analytics
Learn how to onboard repositories to Sema using a phased approach, focusing on scoped access and noise reduction to ensure effective code analytics.
Loading…
ReadMeFeed / Community knowledge
#code-review
Real questions. Useful conversations. Find the people who know your stack.
githubCodeac in the PR Queue: What an Automated Reviewer Should Be Allowed to Block
Automated PR review bots fail when they block too much. A practical policy for deciding which Codeac findings should stop a merge, and how to measure it in a pilot.
Enforcing Required Approvals on GitLab Merge Requests: A Practical Guide
A step‑by‑step walkthrough for setting minimum approvals, using CODEOWNERS, and verifying the merge gate in GitLab.
gitlabEnable Codeac AI‑Powered Code Review in GitHub: Configuration and Common Pitfalls
Add a .codeac.yml file and enable the AI Review toggle to let Codeac generate inline review comments on GitHub pull requests. The guide covers configuration, how the AI works, limits, and common pitfalls.
Sema AI review comments: blocking gate or advisory input for a repeatable team review process?
Our team is adopting Sema's AI-assisted code review to make feedback more consistent across pull requests and reviewers. The documented capability we are relying on is AI-generated review comments that draw on repository context, and we can run them either as autonomous output on every PR or as drafts that a human reviewer approves or edits. The unresolved d
semaSema code review and GitHub pull requests: how is analysis bounded on very large diffs?
Integration boundary We are evaluating the Sema code-review tool connected to GitHub, where automated review comments are posted directly onto pull requests. The boundary in question is between Sema's analysis engine and the GitHub pull-request API. Goal Understand what happens when a pull request exceeds a practical size — many changed files, a very large d