| | 1 | = Review Guidelines = |
| | 2 | |
| | 3 | Reviewers should use the following questions as guidelines for their review. Generally a review covers four areas: user interface, functionality, code, and documentation. It depends on the ticket which areas are affected. |
| | 4 | |
| | 5 | A '''full review''' covers all of the questions. |
| | 6 | |
| | 7 | A '''minimal review''' covers at least the first two questions of each area. |
| | 8 | |
| | 9 | == User Interface == |
| | 10 | * Does it have the look and feel of !HeuristicLab? |
| | 11 | * Is it understandable, does the user know what to do? |
| | 12 | |
| | 13 | * Are appropriate controls used? |
| | 14 | * Are controls correctly locked/set readonly? |
| | 15 | * Is it responsive? |
| | 16 | |
| | 17 | == Functionality == |
| | 18 | * Are important features missing? |
| | 19 | * Are there additional interesting features (maybe for later)? |
| | 20 | |
| | 21 | * Are/should unit tests be included? |
| | 22 | * Is the impact of the change appropriate? |
| | 23 | * Is the feature implemented in the right plugin? |
| | 24 | * Is it fast enough? |
| | 25 | |
| | 26 | == Code == |
| | 27 | * Does the code follow the DevelopersGuidelines (style, naming conventions, etc.)? |
| | 28 | * Are suitable class, property and parameter names used? |
| | 29 | |
| | 30 | * Is the code understandable or is there an appropriate comment? |
| | 31 | * Is backwards compatibility maintained? |
| | 32 | * Do the common unit tests pass? |
| | 33 | * Is the code written according to already used concepts? |
| | 34 | * Were common pitfalls avoided (missing event handler registration in !AfterDeserializationHook, missing members in cloning constructor)? |
| | 35 | |
| | 36 | == Documentation == |
| | 37 | * Is it correct and up to date? |
| | 38 | * Is important information missing? |
| | 39 | |
| | 40 | * Is the style consistent with the rest of the documentation? |
| | 41 | * Is it short enough? |
