Seven Sins of SW Reviews

Meer zoals dit

ToDo of FT SG

door 拓己 相川

DIGITAL LEARNING

door mg licandro

Civil Engineering

door Shaun Bunch

WWII - Unit Plan Map

door Joshua Chung

This article analysis has been performed by: Alexandrina GOLUB, IV year student in the Computer Science department of UPT.

Seven Sins of SW Reviews

7. Reviewers Focus on Style, Not Substance

my opinion: Indeed, many people focus on style, rather that code essentials, just like a good majority of us finds it hard to perceive a message, when the grammar is faulty. Probably, having "slyle team" and "defects team" would help on this matter.

6. The Wrong People Participate

my opinion: The rule of thumb suggested by the author is having 3-7 people participate in the review process, mostly those implied in the code production or affected by its result. I would probably add a highly skilled senior SW developer to help with this.

5. Reviewers Are Not Planned

my opinion: Here, what the author points out seems to me an essential problem: lack of preparation will drag the whole meeting down. I too think supplying the re- viewers with enough time and documentation is the key to success.

4. Review Meetings Drift Into Problem-Solving

my opinion: Well, only focusing on the problem and not the solution is definitely easier said, than done. People will every so often try to jump in "for help". I love the author's solution: if problem solving takes less than 1 minute, go for it. But then: who will keep track of this 1 min time?

3. Reviews Are Not Planned

my opinion: This issue seemed to me a little bit common sense. Indeed, a review should be a planned activity. But then, shouldn't it be thought of such in the first place, like any other activity performed in a SW design process?

2. Reviewers Critique the Producer, Not the Product

my opinion: I could not agree more with this particular issue. Indeed, people often get personal and aggressive when dealing with collective problems. I would offer my own solution: hire a conflict manager or an internal mediator.

1. Participants Don't Understand the Review Process

my opinion: I agree that participant might often not have a clear idea as to what they are asked to do. But, as the article suggests, a training will solve this problem. Yet, I consider that more than 8 hours are needed to delve in the subject.