A problem with code review is that people treat is as proofreading a final project, so it isn't effective for collaboration before a solution is obvious and quick to code up.
We need more informal/preliminary ways to code-review work in progress
I work on Openstack, which uses gerrit for review. We use blueprints in launchpad to do preliminary design, then reference the blueprint in the commit message, and frequently people working on patches with hacky implementations will mark it as WIP, which is basically a signal not to approve but to provide feedback.
One thing the article didn't mention is that code review works across companies and is ideal for open source work.
Comments
A problem with code review is that people treat is as proofreading a final project, so it isn't effective for collaboration before a solution is obvious and quick to code up.
We need more informal/preliminary ways to code-review work in progress
I work on Openstack, which uses gerrit for review. We use blueprints in launchpad to do preliminary design, then reference the blueprint in the commit message, and frequently people working on patches with hacky implementations will mark it as WIP, which is basically a signal not to approve but to provide feedback.
One thing the article didn't mention is that code review works across companies and is ideal for open source work.