Dr. Rob Hasker SE 3800 Note 9 Reviews

Definition of Done Item check in Builds Tests pass Item reviewed

Types of reviews Sprint review Reviews for pull requests Discuss which PBIs done, which not done Demonstrate from master Feedback from demonstrations Ensure know priorities going forward Reviews for pull requests Execute tests Prioritize! Can’t move to done without. Might not comment on every one, but should comment on some Consider introducing staging environment Define staging environment

Formal reviews of artifacts Separate from sprint review Especially typical in plan-based processes Types Personal: desk check to find logic errors in code Consider doing before running code – will find more errors! Internal: find errors before clients Signoff: client accepts artifact, possibly with changes High profile: attended by VPs, program management These are typically status updates, project direction discussions Expectations Checking quality, content Design: all non-functional requirements covered Code: quality, ensure logic Tests: coverage, correctness Frequently: knowledge transfer

Issues with formal reviews Temptation: equate review & grading More errors: lower grade! Problem: discourages finding errors… Temptation: fix errors during review Engineers like to fix things… Temptation: have everyone on the team at the review # errors found ∝ number of eyes present? I.e., more people means more errors found? Temptation: review everything at once We hate doing it, so git it done…

Robust formal reviews Review the product, not the producer Constructive tone, not an inquisition Producer likely the one to find the most problems! Do not use review results for simple evaluation Set an agenda and maintain it Leader must ensure this Limit debate If there’s disagreement, record the issue and move on Further discussion can happen off-line Reviews are expensive! … where the goal is to find errors.

Effective reviews Identify problems, don’t try to solve them Short discussion can be fine, but don’t let it bog down the review Very few good decisions are developed during meetings! Generating ideas is important and useful during a brain-storming session, but a review is not a brain-storming session Take written notes If rely on people’s memories, important decisions will be forgotten

Effective reviews Use a checklist Limit the number of participants < three: not enough heads to see problems Too many: meeting can get bogged down easily Too many cooks spoil the soup Formal reviews w/ customer: likely to have more people present, but don’t expect as many errors to be found! Use a checklist Helps keep review focused Allocate, schedule time for reviews They don’t happen if just “slide them in” to other work

Effective reviews Use a checklist Limit the number of participants < three: not enough heads to see problems Too many: meeting can get bogged down easily Too many cooks spoil the soup Formal reviews w/ customer: likely to have more people present, but don’t expect as many errors to be found! Use a checklist Helps keep review focused Allocate, schedule time for reviews They don’t happen if just “slide them in” to other work Almost always: participants expected to review items before meetings and post action items.

Effective reviews Limit review sessions to 1-2 hours Train for reviews Longer: review loses effectiveness quickly Difficult to schedule long meetings Large documents: break into pieces, review separately Train for reviews Ensure engineers know how to conduct a review Key issue: review product, not producer Review early reviews Make sure your reviews are effective!

Review Team Roles Review leader Producer Recorder Reviewers (Some would call this an inspection team) Review leader Invites reviewers, possibly including customer Ensures materials published before review Ensures review session stays on track Producer Person(s) who created document Recorder Record notes from review so issues not lost Generally one of the reviewers a non-technical person probably won't be able to follow the discussion adequately Reviewers

Reviews Reviews, inspections Ensuring reviews are effective Possible exercise: review tests (exercise 8)