

What they did was far beyond “agile”. They didn’t care for naming conventions, documentation, not committing commented-out code, using existing solutions (both in-house and third-party) instead of reinventing the wheel…
In that first review I had literally hundreds of comments that each on their own would be a reason to reject the pull request.





I tried to summarize it but couldn’t get it to a good length without losing too much detail. I would recommend this Wikipedia article (just run it through some translation tool; it’s way more detailed than the English article).