Azure DevOps had a strong implementation of this. For reviewers, it’s critical to know whether their comments were applied as intended, and seeing them directly in the updated files makes that process straightforward.

Yes

می‌خواهم بتوانم در حالی که پنجره‌ی نظرات باز است، در درخواست Pull اسکرول کنم.

دلیل: وقتی یک نظر قدیمی است، باید به نسخه فعلی نگاه کنیم تا بررسی کنیم که آیا واقعاً به آن نظر اشاره دارد یا خیر.

من واقعاً عاشق این ویژگی هستم! متشکرم!!!

Yes, this should be a user-level (and per-PR) preference. It reduces review noise, improves focus, and was already supported in the old experience.

I came here just to comment "Thank you for the branch name in the sticky header". I can't tell you how many mammoth PR's I've had to scroll up, or duplicate the tab, or (insert method of getting branch name here)... now the branch name is just there and copy-able. 🤌

Similarly, I miss having a sticky bar below the PR's title to have the "Conversation" tab/button visible without having to scroll bar to the top.

Alternatively, users could still do Cmd+Up to scroll up and then click on the tab, but doing so doesn't scroll if the focus is on the diff panel, so you need to click on the files sidebar or the page margins and then use the shortcut.

It's not a critical issue, but a little annoying.

I know exactly what you mean — the old sticky bar made it so much quicker to jump back to the Conversation tab. Right now the extra scrolling or focus-shifting adds friction, especially during long reviews. A persistent header or sticky navigation with the tabs always visible would be a nice quality-of-life improvement. Not critical, but definitely one of those small things that would make the workflow feel smoother.

This update focuses on three essential pillars of a modern code review experience: performance, UX, and accessibility.

Optimized diff rendering with reduced memory consumption.

This update focuses on three essential pillars of a modern code review experience:
performance, user experience, and accessibility.

We’ve optimized diff rendering to significantly reduce memory consumption,
resulting in faster load times and smoother navigation when reviewing large
pull requests.

https://github.com/orgs/community/discussions/5486

this is not showing up for me, rather i am getting a comment option on the pr level, having it on a file level would really be great, current i open two split windows to check my older comments and the latest code.

this is happening for me too.

Some comments are showing up in file and some are not

where is the copilot here?

It was actually working better in the old flow and there was even a blog post from Github: https://github.blog/changelog/2021-10-14-hiding-whitespace-is-now-remembered-for-each-pull-request/

The old flow worked better because features like "hide whitespace" were remembered per pull request, as GitHub highlighted in their 2021 blog post
. The new experience seems to have lost some of that convenience, so restoring those capabilities would improve usability.

remembering per-user and per-PR seems both obvious and would result in a significantly better experience.

Thanks for the feedback.

• We are planning to support seamless switching of "hide whitespace-only changes", but no timeline yet.
• We are also exploring the implications of making this a user-level preference so it would be remembered/applied consistently across all PRs. Do others have thoughts/opinions on this?

Would it be possible to set "Compact line height" as a user preference as well? I like the changes overall but much prefer the original setting.

"Hide whitespace-only changes" as a user-pref sounds good.
Regarding line spacing, currently, compact mode is an option but the default is to be "extra line height". I feel like "Compact line height" should be the default (to match the current experience, but also because the greater code density from compact mode is in my opinion likely to be more useful to more people when reviewing, compared to the accessibility-focused greater spacing).

Peer review comments are now very hard to find and finally after an hour of searching around I found the 💬 icon and when I clicked on the reply, it just barfed and took me to the Files Changed view without showing the review comments or their replies.

Any workarounds to obtain permanent urls?

@rtalexk which browser are you using? Clicking the line number should just highlight the line, not open the add comment flow.

I'm using Arc Browser, but this isn't happening anymore. 👀

unfortunately it looks like pressing a to hide them doesn't work anymore.

When this feature comes back, it'd be nice if hiding the annotations also stopped them from being added to the clipboard when copying code.

Thanks for the feedback. We are planning to restore the ability to use a to hide annotations.

@willsmythe any update on when this is getting added?

In addition to using a to hide annotations, can we have a global (user) setting to hide annotations by default?
Having to tap a (which does not always work correctly, particularly for large diffs) for every PR in repos that overuse annotations (a distressingly common practice that makes review a painful chore) is irritating and we're still left with (often) dozens of files that now have no visible change because some irrelevant annotation happened to touch that unchanged file.

Are you not planning on adding this feature back anymore? Did you forget about it? Do you need help? If you need the code here is what I was able to do to add this feature from my browser console:

document.addEventListener('keydown', (e) => {
  if (e.key === 'a' || e.key === 'A') {
    document.querySelectorAll('.InlineMarkers-module__markersWrapper--Fw1hl').forEach(el => {
      el.style.display = el.style.display === 'none' ? '' : 'none';
    });
  }
});

Files below is preferable IMO for a more consistent experience

But I also would welcome files above, it would be a massive improvement 🙌

Indeed, files below would also be consistent with GitHub's own repo tree view.

I see the value in being consistent with the repo’s tree view; nevertheless, having files listed first can have some interesting use cases. For example, if a PR includes a changelog file or a “manifest,” listing files first would make it one of the first (often the very first) files shown, which I think is nice when reviewing code. In my opinion, that would greatly help the review process. Just my two cents.

I recommend sorting the same way as git diff-tree, which is what I think the old view did.

$ git diff-tree -r ..main
:100644 100644 d68e1befa16c82c562359a15a283a838d72b0727 e24eac8e828629741b34632e9ef2493a9a95d753 M      src/cryptosuite.rs
:000000 100644 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000 9ad4b1337b54bf28686cf4becccac13124fe6747 A      src/cryptosuite/bip340_jcs.rs
:000000 100644 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000 ab474845d58506540e0ac7e6f0e287770efa1b41 A      src/cryptosuite/bip340_rdfc.rs
:000000 100644 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000 92337d2e16e7ec1f1d2ebc0836773c2099538a1d A      src/cryptosuite/transformation.rs
:000000 100644 0000000000000000000000000000000000000000 fa9ba63738d7b46f5f4647deb01328f6b6981777 A      src/cryptosuite/utils.rs
:100644 100644 f016785749ea50aeb255c80d1a08c1f53b108f6e cd40229a1055c0bd102c6f47318b0d874ab83610 M      src/document.rs
:100644 100644 8b798f1b9f21f3699cdd399939664e9ef4744a8d e2de154c3a730a5b055d6e944e0b8adb98e26f57 M      src/update.rs
:100644 100644 8c80fd426222a68987e2938d37549005bc9db2a0 9c98405bb3803c789dd49a23ca291f2fd9b774cd M      src/zcap/proof.rs

Old view:

New view:

Most tools put the folders first but I wish the standard was files first.

The files in a folder typically describe its contents. For example READMEs, Changelogs, manifests, public functions/interfaces. The sub folders contain the implementation details. I would like to read those first when reviewing a PR (or writing code).

That lets me see if their description makes sense to someone who does not know the internal implementation details. Then I can drill into the sub folders that contain the described implementation to see if they match.

It also helps for languages, like golang, that have a vendor folder containing a copy of all dependencies. It would end up at the end of the PR which is perfect since I basically ignore it when doing a review. Right now I have to scroll past all the vendor files to get to the top level files. That can lead to them being missed.

Ok

App.tsx

components/
hooks/
index.ts
styles/
utils.ts

Should there be a separate thread for the "loading state" issue? I'm afraid this might be buried because the "comment on file" issue has been fixed.

This is still happening for me when selecting "Files owned by me". They don't load, and I am unable to review. Any known workaround?

Workaround I've just found, go back to old experience, then load again the new experience.

We are rolling this out to users slowly, you should be able to see it soon 🎉

My team has the process of always asking Copilot "Any mistakes made? Review this PR" before doing manual reviews.
Just like @JayLathiaTR, I think that being able to talk to Copilot about all the changes is an important feature.
This would also be an improvement, because previously I had to manually click all checkboxes, sometimes more than a hundred of them.

I'd prefer that this button stay since it's related to the PR and its changes.

Feature request: allow people who object to AI (and there are many of us) to turn it off, completely, without the risk of accidentally using it by some misclick or dark pattern.

Bug: This button is visible even if Copilot is fully disabled in user settings.

Asking Copilot to summarize the PR is important to my workflow, so I would like the Ask Copilot button to return to the Files Changed page as well. An alternative could be allowing non-main branch files to be attached to regular Copilot chat, since currently only files on the main branch for all repos can be attached.

Thanks for the feedback. We'll address.

On the topic of emojis, I really liked that I could type e.g. :idea and it would suggest the 💡 emoji. It would be great if this functionality were preserved (or even expanded upon 🙏 )

Thanks for the feedback. Both are known issues we're tracking.

Indeed! I am also missing this functionality in the new view.

True, I use the "comment on this file" feature quite often and I switched to the old view just because it's missing on the new one 😿

+

How to hide alerts? I can toggle alerts by pressing "A" in old UI

This is very important for me.

@willsmythe Given the severity of the issue and the fact that that it's been present for at least 3 months already, I assume that fixing this (or finding a repro?) is hard. Do you need any more info to repro and fix this? I can repro it easily.

As mentioned by others above, this bug kinda makes the new UI dangerous to use so I'm gonna have to turn it off soon, which is a bummer. Please let us know when this issue is fixed so we can all turn the new UI back on. Thanks.

This has been driving me crazy. It happens every time I follow a link from an email, which for me means almost every time I go to review something I now have to remember that the UI is lying to me, which is infuriating!

Also switched back to the old UI because of this! I almost always open PRs from the email link, so this is a completely breaking bug for me.

I'm only seeing ONE.

One at a time. I have to open the directory sidebar and click on each file or click the next/prev file buttons.

Whoever did this should be fired.

to be fair, they are showing an explicit notice, so it seems rather intentional

👍 any of the above; missing being able to see what changed; I have to flip back to do the old experience to do it

Our release process heavily relies on the ability to click through to see the commit diff of submodules. Will be very sad to see this go.

I want to see that nice summary of changes for non-GitHub hosted submodules, too.

I would like to be able to see which commit I’m starting from and which one I’m going to in the changed submodules, as the old interface used to show.

I also want to see the submodule commitId change in the file preview, it is necessary for our code review

Currently, I think the toggle is just backwards. "Hide whitespace" turned on sets the query param to ?w=1, and turning it of sets it to ?w=0. Expected behaviour should be the other way around. So in @rmartins0's case, that link works as it should, as w=1 shows whitespaces and w=0 hides them.

I believe i was able to reproduce this. See steps at: https://github.com/orgs/community/discussions/163932#discussioncomment-13915305

Related: https://github.com/orgs/community/discussions/163932#discussioncomment-14012281

A certain order of the URL parameters triggers this bug. This works:
.../files?w=1&file-filters%5B%5D=.yml&file-filters%5B%5D=.tf

But if I put the hide-whitespace parameter after the file-filter parameters, it doesn't work:
.../files?file-filters%5B%5D=.yml&file-filters%5B%5D=.tf&w=1

The parameters are added to the URL in the order of selecting the options in the GUI. So, to avoid the bug, you need to show/hide whitespace, then apply file filters.

The old UI works as expected.

Same issue here on Win 11 + Edge 124. Worked after disabling “XYZ” flag. Thanks for the workaround!