Skip to content

Review Process

Warning

This documentation is currently under construction and may not be up to date.

  • The reviewer and reviewee discuss the type of review required.
    • If time is a factor, focus effort on the High Priority items.
    • Agree whether the reviewer can make corrections related to the Low Priority items, e.g., typos or unused imports, directly to the branch.
  • If the reviewer feels they need more information after an initial look at the code, they request a pair review with the reviewee.
  • The reviewer presents the review to the reviewee (with reasons for priority as necessary), either via the Jira ticket (e.g., if the feedback is minimal), a Confluence page, e-mails, or in person, as appropriate.
  • The reviewee assesses the reviewer's recommendations and makes any appropriate changes to the code.
    • Open a new Jira ticket for any low risk issues that do not need to be resolved immediately.
  • The reviewee documents the important points from the review about why things were done (or not done) for whatever reasons on the Jira ticket (for future reference).
  • The reviewee updates the Coding Guidelines appropriately.

Review Checklists

High Priority

  • Is the code in version control?
  • Does the code work as expected?
  • Does the code manage the risk around availability of resources such as files, databases, mass (assess the risk though first)
  • Does the code check for common errors?
  • Does the code use exceptions appropriately?
  • Are there corresponding unit tests for the code?
  • Can the unit tests be executed?
  • Is there corresponding documentation for the code?
  • Can the documentation be built?
  • Is the documentation easy to understand?

Medium Priority

  • Is the code easy to read and understand?
  • Has repetitive code been avoided?
  • Is the code easy to maintain?

Low Priority

  • Does the code comply to the coding standards?