An interesting article from IBM: http://www.ibm.com/developerworks/rational/library/11-proven-practices-for-peer-review/
There is a pretty strong bias for "we found these results and look at how our tool makes it easier to follow these guidelines", but the core results are actually pretty good. I certainly recommend reading it and keeping some of it in mind while you're both coding and reviewing. (Particularly how long should code review take, and how much code should be put up for review at a time.) Another trick that we haven't made much use of is to annotate the code we put up for review. We have the summary description, but you can certainly put some inline comments on your own proposal if you want to highlight areas more clearly. John =:->
-- Juju-dev mailing list [email protected] Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/juju-dev
