Thoughts to keep in mind for Code Review

[Eric Snow]

On Wed, Jun 25, 2014 at 2:39 AM, Menno Smits <menno.smits at canonical.com> wrote:
> I completely agree with Ian's point about code needing to be
> self-explanatory and stand on it's own.
>
> That said, the article mentions that the process of creating review
> annotations encourages the author to review their own work in a way that
> they may have not done otherwise, eliminating problems before anyone else
> even looks at the code. Effectively, a phase of self review happens before
> peer review driving the defect rate down and probably making the peer review
> more efficient.

I've found this to be an effective part of my personal workflow,
usually stepping away from the code (even overnight) before doing a
self review.  Doing it in the review tool sometimes makes sense but in
most cases I'll just run through a prettified diff locally and make
XXX comments in the respective files.

However, review annotations are most useful when you notice something
*after* you've published the review request.  They're a good way to
get focused feedback in that situation.

-eric