XiphWiki - User contributions [en]

DaalaReview

2013-06-19T18:37:11Z

Bbrittain:

This is a '''proposal''' for a more flexible review process. It is a set of guidelines for the most appropriate approach for different types of changes. Above all, use your judgement.

== Definitions ==
*A) Full review: Same as current process. Can be based on Rietveld, "git format-patch", or a pull request
*B) Post-review: Code gets committed to repo first, committer nags reviewer weekly if necessary
*C) Design review: Discuss with original author (and possibly others) for the principle of a change, can (and probably should) be done even before doing the work
*D) No review: self-explanatory

== Guidelines ==
*0) Full-review on anything the committer has reasons to believe would be controversial, buggy, ...
*1) Generally no review on comments/whitespace/style/documentation
** Except potentially when changing Doxygen API comments
*2) Post-review on code that is already badly broken, or on simple bug fixes
*3) No review on initial commit of new stuff that isn't being called
** Full-review required to hook any code not reviewed because of point 3
** If code in point 3 breaks the build, it gets fixed immediately or removed
** No review on new tools until they get used by other people
*4) Code that is (according to the committer) highly unlikely to break things or that is trivially testable gets post-review
*5) Code that may have subtle implications gets full review
*6) Refactoring of someone else's code gets design review, followed by either post-review (or full review if requested during design review)
*7) Disruptive work (e.g. block switching) gets both design review and full review.
*8) Most build system changes get no review (unless point 0 applies)
*9) Post-review on test code

== Examples ==
1) [https://git.xiph.org/?p=daala.git;a=commitdiff;h=da726b32 da726b32], [https://git.xiph.org/?p=daala.git;a=commitdiff;h=53362b77 53362b77]
2) [https://git.xiph.org/?p=daala.git;a=commitdiff;h=212d13b3 212d13b3],
3) [https://git.xiph.org/?p=daala.git;a=commitdiff;h=76ee32c8 76ee32c8], [https://git.xiph.org/?p=daala.git;a=commitdiff;h=75b62b23 75b62b23]
4) [https://git.xiph.org/?p=daala.git;a=commitdiff;h=7c102188 7c102188], [https://git.xiph.org/?p=daala.git;a=commitdiff;h=50732d66 50732d66]
5) [https://git.xiph.org/?p=daala.git;a=commitdiff;h=8cd46564 8cd46564], [https://git.xiph.org/?p=daala.git;a=commitdiff;h=74dc3616 74dc3616]
6) [https://git.xiph.org/?p=daala.git;a=commitdiff;h=208ea300 208ea300]
7) [https://git.xiph.org/?p=daala.git;a=commitdiff;h=b4bfee65 b4bfee65]
8) [https://git.xiph.org/?p=daala.git;a=commitdiff;h=7cc3cc5f 7cc3cc5f], [https://git.xiph.org/?p=daala.git;a=commitdiff;h=487fe063 487fe063]

== Team reviews ==
*1) Once in a while, we should pick a piece of code
*2) Original author cleans up code, adds comments
*3) Code discussed with entire team
*4) Suggestions for improvement (with emphasis on algo)

DaalaReview

2013-06-19T18:33:33Z

Bbrittain: fixed ) abiguity

This is a '''proposal''' for a more flexible review process. It is a set of guidelines for the most appropriate approach for different types of changes. Above all, use your judgement.

== Definitions ==
*A) Full review: Same as current process. Can be based on Rietveld, "git format-patch", or a pull request
*B) Post-review: Code gets committed to repo first, committer nags reviewer weekly if necessary
*C) Design review: Discuss with original author (and possibly others) for the principle of a change, can (and probably should) be done even before doing the work
*D) No review: self-explanatory

== Guidelines ==
*0) Full-review on anything the committer has reasons to believe would be controversial, buggy, ...
*1) Generally no review on comments/whitespace/style/documentation
** Except potentially when changing Doxygen API comments
*2)Post-review on code that is already badly broken, or on simple bug fixes
*3) No review on initial commit of new stuff that isn't being called
** Full-review required to hook any code not reviewed because of point 3
** If code in point 3 breaks the build, it gets fixed immediately or removed
** No review on new tools until they get used by other people
*4) Code that is (according to the committer) highly unlikely to break things or that is trivially testable gets post-review
*5) Code that may have subtle implications gets full review
*6) Refactoring of someone else's code gets design review, followed by either post-review (or full review if requested during design review)
*7) Disruptive work (e.g. block switching) gets both design review and full review.
*8) Most build system changes get no review (unless point 0 applies)
*9) Post-review on test code

== Examples ==
1) [https://git.xiph.org/?p=daala.git;a=commitdiff;h=da726b32 da726b32], [https://git.xiph.org/?p=daala.git;a=commitdiff;h=53362b77 53362b77]
2) [https://git.xiph.org/?p=daala.git;a=commitdiff;h=212d13b3 212d13b3],
3) [https://git.xiph.org/?p=daala.git;a=commitdiff;h=76ee32c8 76ee32c8], [https://git.xiph.org/?p=daala.git;a=commitdiff;h=75b62b23 75b62b23]
4) [https://git.xiph.org/?p=daala.git;a=commitdiff;h=7c102188 7c102188], [https://git.xiph.org/?p=daala.git;a=commitdiff;h=50732d66 50732d66]
5) [https://git.xiph.org/?p=daala.git;a=commitdiff;h=8cd46564 8cd46564], [https://git.xiph.org/?p=daala.git;a=commitdiff;h=74dc3616 74dc3616]
6) [https://git.xiph.org/?p=daala.git;a=commitdiff;h=208ea300 208ea300]
7) [https://git.xiph.org/?p=daala.git;a=commitdiff;h=b4bfee65 b4bfee65]
8) [https://git.xiph.org/?p=daala.git;a=commitdiff;h=7cc3cc5f 7cc3cc5f], [https://git.xiph.org/?p=daala.git;a=commitdiff;h=487fe063 487fe063]

== Team reviews ==
*1) Once in a while, we should pick a piece of code
*2) Original author cleans up code, adds comments
*3) Code discussed with entire team
*4) Suggestions for improvement (with emphasis on algo)