Whether you’re steering an open source project or leading full-time a software development team, the key to maximizing productivity lies in efficient code reviews.
I’ll just leave this here:
Submitted 8 months ago by otto@programming.dev to programming@programming.dev
https://optimizedbyotto.com/post/how-to-code-review/
Whether you’re steering an open source project or leading full-time a software development team, the key to maximizing productivity lies in efficient code reviews.
I’ll just leave this here:
CameronDev@programming.dev 8 months ago
I think a lot of these are opinions stated as facts.
The nitpicking one seems to be using a different definition of “nitpick”. To me, a nitpick is to pick on something entirely meaningless (eg. Fullstops at end of comments, slight incorrect variable names, code alignment). If i see a review full of those I assume the reviewer skipped the correctness checks, and phoned in the review.
The
git push --force
is definitely a controversial suggestion, im personally happy with doing that, but I have also personally accidentally force pushed dev/main and seen others do it. Squash on merge is probably a safer habit to have. Also, gitlab and bitbucket both get a bit confused if you forcepush to a branch that is part of a MR.Reviewer fixing problems is also situational. For open source stuff, if you rely on the submitter, youll frequently jusy end up with an abandonned PR. For team stuff, the original author may have already moved on to another ticket, so pushing it back may stretch out the development cycle and cause the code to become stale, and potentially unmergable. Our solution is to just communicate. “This is wrong, I am going to fix and merge. Cool?”
The article is very light on how to actually review for correctness, which in my experience is the thing people struggle with most. Things to look for (Non-exhaustive):
tatterdemalion@programming.dev 8 months ago
You can add branch protections that will prevent you from accidental force pushing to
main
ordev
.IMO when I see a PR with “WIP” commits, I just assume that minimal effort was put into keeping the commits organized, and I squash all commits to review the PR. If I see many meaningful commit messages, I will try reviewing one commit at a time.