Hey all! My team at work is struggling with growing pains of getting into a formalized review process, so I was wondering if any of you guys have some things to live or die by in your code reviews. How much of it is manual, or how much is just static code analysis + style guide stuff, etc?

  • mustyOrange@beehaw.org
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    Midwestern b tier company:

    1. Test your code on its own branch. Make sure it’s not fucked

    2. Pr to dev, do code review with devs that call you out on your bullshit (were all lazy sometimes)

    3. Whip up QA doc, send the ticket to the QA queue

    4. Confirm with BU that all their bases are covered and nothing is missing

    5. Repeat steps for inevitable wishy washy scope creep from BA who wants to have inevitable meetings that could be done in emails

    6. Complete merge to dev, merge dev to master, and tell devops that it’s ready to go

    • pattern@beehaw.orgOP
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      Ah yes, sounds about right. I particularly prefer the “make sure it’s not fucked” step, very effective😂 I’d like to get more formal code reviews in place with my current team, I think we could all benefit.