Timeline for Where is the value of online diff code review?
Current License: CC BY-SA 4.0
6 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Dec 12, 2020 at 15:22 | comment | added | kriss | I was probably unclear in my comment, but I understand. "In-depth review" and "quick glance" are not outcomes, but about how people in my team are doing reviews (and how much time they are ready to spend). I believe we are not focusing enough today on the purpose of the review and what we get of it, but merely on the act of reviewing. In other words we are focusing on review cost and not actually caring of benefits and if we are actually getting them or not. Working on expected benefit could be a way to change review process and eventually tools. | |
| Dec 12, 2020 at 11:26 | comment | added | Thomas Owens♦ | @kriss "In-depth review" and "quick glance" aren't outcomes. Outcomes would be "understand the change", "ensure test coverage", "check understandability", or "find defects". The depth of the review depends on the outcome and the reviewer. I can understand the change and check for readability using an online diff. I can ensure test coverage with a CI report and the diff if test updates are part of the diff. I may be able to understand the change using a diff if I have existing knowledge, but may otherwise need a more in-depth review in my IDE. I'd probably need to use an IDE to find defects. | |
| Dec 12, 2020 at 9:19 | vote | accept | kriss | ||
| Dec 12, 2020 at 9:16 | comment | added | kriss | But indeed working on expected outcomes of reviews could be the right move. Specific troubles are that team alignment is bad on review outcomes. Some are expecting an in depth review (like me), other are merely expecting a quick glance. | |
| Dec 12, 2020 at 9:13 | comment | added | kriss | The teams is rather small. Hence it's easy enough to know all developpers are only using online tools. We had some discussions and some of them are actually ready replace their current practice by IDE based review. But others are not (argument is online review is "enough"). | |
| Dec 12, 2020 at 0:10 | history | answered | Thomas Owens♦ | CC BY-SA 4.0 |