streamlined action plan code review process l.
Download
Skip this Video
Download Presentation
Streamlined Action Plan Code Review Process

Loading in 2 Seconds...

play fullscreen
1 / 16

Streamlined Action Plan Code Review Process - PowerPoint PPT Presentation


  • 85 Views
  • Uploaded on

Streamlined Action Plan Code Review Process. Ken Kopatz Software Process Improvement Network (SPIN) Meeting 30 June 2000. Overall Objective. Bugs are being introduced by overlooking of consequences of minor code changes. Desired Results (Accomplish).

loader
I am the owner, or an agent authorized to act on behalf of the owner, of the copyrighted work described.
capcha
Download Presentation

PowerPoint Slideshow about 'Streamlined Action Plan Code Review Process' - pia


Download Now An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation

Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author.While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server.


- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - E N D - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Presentation Transcript
streamlined action plan code review process

Streamlined Action PlanCode Review Process

Ken Kopatz

Software Process Improvement Network (SPIN) Meeting

30 June 2000

overall objective
Overall Objective
  • Bugs are being introduced by overlooking of consequences of minor code changes.
desired results accomplish
Desired Results (Accomplish)
  • Catch coding errors which may be introduced during code modifications and additions causing regression problems
  • Catch coding errors which result in unanticipated related behavior
  • Catch coding errors before System Test
desired results change
Desired Results (Change)
  • Implement Peer Reviews of code modifications/additions
desired results done
Desired Results (Done)
  • All code is reviewed before being checked into CM for the next release
people
People
  • Each of the developers will be impacted
    • Additional workload in having to review others’ code
    • Additional workload in preparing code for review
    • Time freed by not having to respond to errors occurring in the field
    • Cost and schedule savings in not putting out fires
    • Perception of more work to do in the same time
    • Perception of shortened work schedule if not managed properly
people ctnd
People (ctnd)
  • Software project manager will be affected
    • Additional workload in reviewing code
    • Additional coordination ensuring reviews are done
    • Additional meetings
    • Release dates will be met
    • Fire fighting will be reduced
people ctnd8
People (ctnd)
  • Senior managers
    • Not have to deal with customer complaints
    • Customer satisfaction will increase
    • Release schedules will be met with fewer interruptions and shortened System Test schedule
change factors
Change Factors
  • Concern: Additional workload
    • Extra time will be built into schedule to account for review time
    • Additional time should be realized from not having to fix problems
    • Current practice of reviewing Requirements Specs and Functional Design catch problems early and reduce rework
change factors ctnd
Change Factors (ctnd)
  • Concern: Personal criticism
    • Coding standards will establish an objective criteria for review
    • Current spec reviews are not personal
change factors ctnd11
Change Factors (ctnd)
  • Concern: What standards should be followed
    • Coding standard will be written and agreed to
    • Checklists will provide simple validation for coder as well as reviewer
change factors ctnd12
Change Factors (ctnd)
  • Concern: Creativity will be stifled
    • Standards will provide the framework for creativity
    • Creativity will be in the problem solving
scope boundaries
Scope Boundaries
  • Reviews are limited to all new code and modifications to existing code
  • Existing code will not be reviewed
  • Code will be reviewed for style consistent with the existing code
  • Code will be reviewed for logical errors
  • Reviewers will consist of the project team