Difference between revisions of "Code Review Workflow"
From Agility
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
| − | < | + | <ol> |
<li>We are using Crucible software for code review and also for general review of non svn tasks (if required)</li> | <li>We are using Crucible software for code review and also for general review of non svn tasks (if required)</li> | ||
<li>Our workflow is based on [https://confluence.atlassian.com/crucible/the-crucible-workflow-298977485.html One-to-One Reviews] (without moderator). | <li>Our workflow is based on [https://confluence.atlassian.com/crucible/the-crucible-workflow-298977485.html One-to-One Reviews] (without moderator). | ||
| Line 10: | Line 10: | ||
*Reviewer complete review | *Reviewer complete review | ||
*Author close review | *Author close review | ||
| − | </ | + | </ol> |
Revision as of 07:20, 13 October 2017
- We are using Crucible software for code review and also for general review of non svn tasks (if required)
- Our workflow is based on One-to-One Reviews (without moderator).
- Responsibility of task owner (developer / tester) is to create review and assign to it Reviewer
- There is no general rule for Reviewer selection it is agreement between Task Owner and Reviewer (agreement can be made on Daily)
- After positive review (or settlement with Reviewer ;-) :
- Reviewer complete review
- Author close review
