Open main menu
Home
Random
Recent changes
Special pages
Community portal
Preferences
About Wikipedia
Disclaimers
Incubator escapee wiki
Search
User menu
Talk
Dark mode
Contributions
Create account
Log in
Editing
Code review
(section)
Warning:
You are not logged in. Your IP address will be publicly visible if you make any edits. If you
log in
or
create an account
, your edits will be attributed to your username, along with other benefits.
Anti-spam check. Do
not
fill this in!
=== Regular change-based code review (Walk-throughs) === Software development teams typically adopt a more lightweight review process in which the scope of each review is on the changes to the codebase performed in a ticket, user story, commit, or some other unit of work.<ref name="rigby2013fse">{{cite book |last1=Rigby |first1=Peter |title=Proceedings of the 2013 9th Joint Meeting on Foundations of Software Engineering |last2=Bird |first2=Christian |date=2013 |isbn=9781450322379 |pages=202–212 |chapter=Convergent contemporary software peer review practices |citeseerx=10.1.1.641.1046 |doi=10.1145/2491411.2491444 |s2cid=11163811}}</ref><ref name="baum2017profes" /> Furthermore, there are rules or conventions that integrate the review task into the development workflow through conventions like mandatory review of all tickets, commonly as part of a [[pull request]], instead of explicitly planning each review. Such a process is called "regular, change-based code review".<ref name="baum2016qrs"/> There are many variations of this basic process. A 2017 survey of 240 development teams found that 90% of teams using code review followed a change-based process, with 60% specifically using regular change-based review.<ref name="baum2017profes"/> Major software corporations known to use changed-based code review include Microsoft,<ref name="macleod2017ieee">{{cite journal |last1=MacLeod |first1=Laura |last2=Greiler |first2=Michaela |last3=Storey |first3=Margaret-Anne|last4=Bird |first4=Christian|last5=Czerwonka |first5=Jacek|title=Code Reviewing in the Trenches: Challenges and Best Practices |journal= IEEE Software |volume=35 |issue=4 |pages=34 |date=2017 |doi=10.1109/MS.2017.265100500 |s2cid=49651487 | url=https://www.michaelagreiler.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/03/Code-Reviewing-in-the-Trenches-Understanding-Challenges-Best-Practices-and-Tool-Needs.pdf | access-date=2020-11-28 }}</ref> Google,<ref name="sadowskiicse18">{{cite book |last1=Sadowski|first1=Caitlin |last2=Söderberg|first2=Emma|last3=Church|first3=Luke|last4=Sipko|first4=Michal|last5=Baachelli|first5=Alberto|title=Proceedings of the 40th International Conference on Software Engineering: Software Engineering in Practice |chapter=Modern code review: A case study at google |pages=181–190 |date=2018 |doi=10.1145/3183519.3183525|isbn=9781450356596 |s2cid=49217999 |doi-access=free}}</ref> and Facebook.
Edit summary
(Briefly describe your changes)
By publishing changes, you agree to the
Terms of Use
, and you irrevocably agree to release your contribution under the
CC BY-SA 4.0 License
and the
GFDL
. You agree that a hyperlink or URL is sufficient attribution under the Creative Commons license.
Cancel
Editing help
(opens in new window)