>At Google, no code, for any product, for any project, gets checked in until it gets a positive review.
I can't believe that's true as stated.
I am guessing "No code is put to a branch which is used by others without review or "No code is put into production without review". I can't imagine "You aren't allowed to check in things without getting signoff of others" working period.
It's more like without a code review you can only commit to your personal scratch space.
A more accurate way to state "At Google, no code, for any product, for any project, gets checked in until it gets a positive review" would be that "No code goes into production without a positive code review."
The original statement makes sense if they are not using a DVCS (I know that at least a couple years ago they were mostly a Perforce shop). If they are now using a DVCS then they probably have repos for different code stages plus all the local repos.
They're a Perforce shop (except some open-source-from-the-start projects, like Android). So checking something in is a pretty weighty operation (also, really slow). So actually, the statement is very likely true.
Comments
>At Google, no code, for any product, for any project, gets checked in until it gets a positive review.
I can't believe that's true as stated.
I am guessing "No code is put to a branch which is used by others without review or "No code is put into production without review". I can't imagine "You aren't allowed to check in things without getting signoff of others" working period.
You can always commit it to your home share but no, at Google all code that is checked in to version control must be reviewed, period.
So you can commit it somewhere.
You just can't commit it to a certain repo.
It's more like without a code review you can only commit to your personal scratch space.
A more accurate way to state "At Google, no code, for any product, for any project, gets checked in until it gets a positive review" would be that "No code goes into production without a positive code review."
Which is completely reasonable. The original contention of no checkins at all sounds like hell.
The original statement makes sense if they are not using a DVCS (I know that at least a couple years ago they were mostly a Perforce shop). If they are now using a DVCS then they probably have repos for different code stages plus all the local repos.
The exception being the "experimental" part of the code base, which can never be used in any production code without undergoing a full code review.
They're a Perforce shop (except some open-source-from-the-start projects, like Android). So checking something in is a pretty weighty operation (also, really slow). So actually, the statement is very likely true.
Don't believe all of it.
TBR.