1 / 15

Formal Peer Review Processes for Software and Documents

Formal Peer Review Processes for Software and Documents. Kenda Albertson. What is a peer review?. Definition according to Merriam-Webster: a process by which something proposed (as for research or publication) is evaluated by a group of experts in the appropriate field.

joelle-mosley
Télécharger la présentation

Formal Peer Review Processes for Software and Documents

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Formal Peer Review Processes for Software and Documents Kenda Albertson

  2. What is a peer review? Definition according to Merriam-Webster: a process by which something proposed (as for research or publication) is evaluated by a group of experts in the appropriate field

  3. Purpose of Peer Reviews Find and record defects before a document is released or code is integrated Receive input from many product experts and stakeholders

  4. Who is Involved? Author Moderator Product Experts / Stakeholders / Reviewers Recorder (Meetings) Quality Assurance

  5. Process Prepare the Review Send Review Notice Hold a Meeting to Discuss Findings (optional) Change Product Based on Recommendations Release Product

  6. Prepare the Review • Author • Prepares the material for the review package • Moderator • Reviews material for readiness • Identifies product experts and stakeholders to invite as reviewers • Send review notice to reviewers • Ensures reviewers have enough time to review • Reviewers • Review the product • Record time spent

  7. Hold a Meeting • Moderator • Conducts the meeting • Author • Answers questions about the product • Reviewers • Present defects in the material • Recorder • Records defects • Records review time for each reviewer

  8. Fix Product • Author • Fixes product based on recommendations • Moderator • Verifies fixes to product

  9. Role of Quality Assurance Supervises process Reviews the document Collects review metrics to track effectiveness

  10. Useful Metrics Review Time Meeting Length Number of Defects Found Types of Defects (Minor, Major, etc.)

  11. Tools for Reviews • Defect Tracking System (Bugzilla) • Excel Spreadsheet • Checklists • Tools Built in to Editors or IDE • Microsoft Word - tracked changes • IBM Rational - CodeCollaborator

  12. CodeCollaborator

  13. Conclusion • Peer Reviews are very useful for finding defects earlier in the process • Peer Reviews are more effective when: • Correct stakeholders are included • Reviewers are given adequate time • Important to collect metrics to evaluate effectiveness

  14. Questions?

  15. References 11 proven practices for more effective, efficient peer code review. Cohen, Jason. http://www.ibm.com/developerworks/rational/library/11-proven-practices-for-peer-review/ Merriam-Webster Online. http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/peer%20review

More Related