The Purpose and Process of Code Review

This chapter explores the purpose and process of code review, emphasizing its role in ensuring the right approach, protecting code integrity, and questioning assumptions. The speakers discuss different experiences and approaches, the challenges of code reviewing in various contexts, and the importance of collaboration and receiving constructive feedback.

Transcript

chevron_right

Play full episode

chevron_right

Transcript

Episode notes

On today’s episode of Ruby for All, Andrew and Julie kick things off with a nostalgic discussion about the beloved game, “Plants vs. Zombies.” Julie explains the game’s concept, setting the stage for a lively conversation that brings us into their gaming experiences and preferences, including cooperative versus competitive gaming. The conversation then transitions to topics relevant to the workplace, including teamwork and communication in a new project that Andrew introduces. They touch on the organizational structure at Podia, the project process, and roles within project teams. Code reviews within project teams are also explored, with insights into how they handle code reviews, expertise in specific code bases, and knowledge sharing strategies to mitigate the “bus factor.” Go ahead and download this episode now!

[00:00:11] Andrew and Julie discuss the game “Plants vs. Zombies.” Julie explains the game’s concept and Andrew talks about Call of Duty Zombies.

[00:01:56] Julie tells us she like cooperative games vs. competitive gaming. Andrew explains different gaming genres, including strategy, shooting, and RPG.

[00:03:20] They discuss playing Guitar Hero, Rock Band, and Mario Kart.

[00:04:54] Andrew introduces a new project and emphasizes the importance of teamwork and communication.

[00:06:18] Andrew explains the organizational structure at Podia, the project process, and roles within project teams.

[00:09:22] Julie asks how many engineers there are at Podia and she inquiries about code reviews within project teams.

[00:10:50] Andrew mentions expertise in specific code bases at Podia and how they track it, also, he discusses knowledge sharing to mitigate the “bus factor” within the team.

[00:12:36] Julie wonders if a team of two typically consists of a backend and a frontend person. Andrew explains that at Podia, they have full-stack engineers, but some specialize more in frontend or backend work based on their skills and preferences.

[00:13:18] A question comes up if Andrew does a lot of pairing, and he explains that pairing frequency varies among team members and shares his preference for daily pairing.

[00:15:55] Andrew shares his assumption that when someone sends a pull request, their code is expected to work, emphasizing that code review serves other purposes.

[00:16:27] Andrew discusses the purpose of code reviews and how they should focus on more than just syntax. He clarifies that code review helps ensure the right approach and maintains codebase integrity.

[00:17:40] Julie mentions her habit of asking if a particular approach is correct during code reviews and discusses the importance of conventions and patterns. She also talks about her experience with cross-team pairing and how it helps identify edge cases and align with other teams’ practices.

[00:18:56] Andrew discusses the challenges of code review when teams are large and points out the potential for one person to become the primary reviewer.

[00:20:43] Andrew suggests that small, specific pull requests with areas of interest can ease code review and mentions that Podia’s teams are smaller, and codebases are more unified.

[00:22:23] Julie shares that her organization had 70 engineers and how cross-team pairing benefits knowledge sharing. She reflects on the learning experience when joining a new team and processes can vary, suggesting that individuals can introduce their preferred practices.

[00:24:15] Julie asks how Andrew discovers bugs in his code, and he explains Podia’s error monitoring and support team processes for bug triage.

Panelists:

Andrew Mason

Julie J.

Sponsors:

Links: