Thoughts to keep in mind for Code Review

[Gustavo Niemeyer]

Thanks, John. Several nice ideas there. I especially like the data
backing the first few points.. it provides evidence to something we
intuitively understand.

I also wrote some points about this same topic, but from a slightly
different perspective, last year:

    http://blog.labix.org/2013/02/06/ethics-for-code-reviewers


On Wed, Jun 25, 2014 at 1:20 AM, John Meinel <john at arbash-meinel.com> wrote:
> An interesting article from IBM:
> http://www.ibm.com/developerworks/rational/library/11-proven-practices-for-peer-review/
>
> There is a pretty strong bias for "we found these results and look at how
> our tool makes it easier to follow these guidelines", but the core results
> are actually pretty good.
>
> I certainly recommend reading it and keeping some of it in mind while you're
> both coding and reviewing. (Particularly how long should code review take,
> and how much code should be put up for review at a time.)
> Another trick that we haven't made much use of is to annotate the code we
> put up for review. We have the summary description, but you can certainly
> put some inline comments on your own proposal if you want to highlight areas
> more clearly.
>
> John
> =:->
>
> --
> Juju-dev mailing list
> Juju-dev at lists.ubuntu.com
> Modify settings or unsubscribe at:
> https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/juju-dev
>



-- 

gustavo @ http://niemeyer.net