Science and Technical Review#
Purpose of the review#
The purpose of code review is to ensure that the code does the job it says it performs, is standards compliant and well documented.
Reviewer responsibilities and checkpoints#
The Sci/Tech review template exists to help you think through all the following areas. A completed review template should be appended to the ticket once you are finished.
The Science / Technical reviewer should
Understand the area of code and check that the changeset satisfies the purpose of the change.
Ensure that the code has no unwanted side-effects
Ensure that the code is written to the standards laid out in UMDP3 or LFRic Coding Styles.
Make sure that the in-line documentation is accurate and sufficient.
Ensure that any related external documentation is updated as necessary.
Check that the Trac ticket has been completed fully and accurately with sufficient detail for others to understand the impact of the change.
Ensure that testing has been carried out satisfactorily (and recorded on the Trac ticket), and that there is no impact for configurations outside the required scope of the changeset.
Final decision points and actions#
The science/technical reviewer must demand that non-compliance is corrected before a change is passed onto the next level of review.
The ticket will likely iterate between the reviewer and the developer during the review process while retaining it’s sci/tech review status. However, the reviewer has the option to “reject and assign” back to the code author should the documentation or code not meet the required standards and major alterations/improvements are required.
Once you are happy that the change is appropriate and correct, complete the approval section of the Sci/Tech review template and re-assign the ticket to the system/code reviewer. If need be ask the code author for the agreed system/code reviewer’s name.