We have a problem that developers are often submitting new commits to a review without resolving all the comments, either because they didn't see the comments yet, or because they are planning to make multiple commits.

Sometimes this ties into BSERV-7534, in the sense that sometimes the comments get buried because the code around them changes. But other times, the comment is still there, it's just on a page of the review which isn't bold, so it doesn't get checked.

Looking into the current feature set, "tasks" seem like they behave like this already. But to create a task, I have to perform additional actions every time I make a comment. I tried this for a few rounds, but the clicking overhead was ridiculous and it was too easy to forget to do it.

Discussing this with other team members, there is a general consensus that in the current state, comments are a useless feature, whereas tasks are useful.

So I believe the ideal workflow would be something like this:

• Comments automatically behave like tasks and must be agreed to merge.
• Comments may be resolvable by the developer, but if they can, the reviewer should be able to reopen them.
• Only the reviewer can close discussion on an issue. (It should not be possible to rapidly approve all comments and just click Merge before the reviewer catches you.)
• Comments may be resolved without updating the code - maybe the reviewer is satisfied by an explanation in the comment thread, and ends up accepting it.

With a workflow like this, the final "I approve of the change" review even becomes redundant. All you have is "I have finished my review", and if you left any unaddressed comments, the merge cannot occur.