PRs can be different, really depends how organization slice tickets
Typically in case of big test suite people use "focus" feature e.g. run test suites only related to the part they change, and if they lucky enough they get isolated part, so running this test suite is enough (this way feedback loop is a bit smaller). Then they commit it and hope it will not break in CI. While test runs, people switch to something else, to the next ticket for example, and then can happen that CI is broken and they need to switch context back to fix it.
Or different approach, people simply give up TDD - they just code everything without running tests and come back to PR only if CI fails.
Does it sound familiar?
For further actions, you may consider blocking this person and/or reporting abuse
We're a place where coders share, stay up-to-date and grow their careers.
Some things are mixed up, let's clear up
Typically in case of big test suite people use "focus" feature e.g. run test suites only related to the part they change, and if they lucky enough they get isolated part, so running this test suite is enough (this way feedback loop is a bit smaller). Then they commit it and hope it will not break in CI. While test runs, people switch to something else, to the next ticket for example, and then can happen that CI is broken and they need to switch context back to fix it.
Or different approach, people simply give up TDD - they just code everything without running tests and come back to PR only if CI fails.
Does it sound familiar?