[openstack-dev] Code review study

Mark Washenberger mark.washenberger at markwash.net
Thu Aug 15 17:00:40 UTC 2013

On Thu, Aug 15, 2013 at 5:12 AM, Christopher Yeoh <cbkyeoh at gmail.com> wrote:

> On Thu, Aug 15, 2013 at 11:42 AM, Robert Collins <
> robertc at robertcollins.net> wrote:
>> This may interest data-driven types here.
>> https://www.ibm.com/developerworks/rational/library/11-proven-practices-for-peer-review/
>> Note specifically the citation of 200-400 lines as the knee of the review
>> effectiveness curve: that's lower than I thought - I thought 200 was
>> clearly fine - but no.
> Very interesting article. One other point which I think is pretty relevant
> is point 4 about getting authors to annotate the code better (and for those
> who haven't read it, they don't mean comments in the code but separately)
> because it results in the authors picking up more bugs before they even
> submit the code.
> So I wonder if its worth asking people to write more detailed commit logs
> which include some reasoning about why some of the more complex changes
> were done in a certain way and not just what is implemented or fixed. As it
> is many of the commit messages are often very succinct so I think it would
> help on the review efficiency side too.
Good commit messages are important, but I wonder if a more direct approach
is for submitters to put review notes for their patches directly in gerrit.
That allows annotation to be directly in place, without the burden of
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-dev/attachments/20130815/bbf26b12/attachment.html>

More information about the OpenStack-dev mailing list