A guide for reviewing code and having your code reviewed.
Watch a presentation that covers this material from Derek Prior at RailsConf 2015.
-
Accept that many programming decisions are opinions
- Discuss tradeoffs, which you prefer, and reach a resolution quickly.
-
Ask good questions; don't make demands
- "What do you think about naming this
:user_id
?"
- "What do you think about naming this
-
Good questions avoid judgment and avoid assumptions about the author's perspective
-
Ask for clarification
- "I didn't understand. Can you clarify?"
-
Avoid selective ownership of code
- "Mine", "not mine", "yours"
-
Avoid using terms that could be seen as referring to personal traits
- "Dumb", "stupid".
- Assume everyone is intelligent and well-meaning.
-
Avoid diminishing words
- "simply", "simple", "just"
-
Be explicit
- Remember people don't always understand your intentions online.
-
Be humble
- "I'm not sure - let's look it up."
-
Don't use hyperbole
- "Always", "never", "endlessly", "nothing"
-
Don't use sarcasm
-
Keep it real
- If emoji, animated gifs, or humor aren't you, don't force them.
- If they are, use them with aplomb.
-
Talk synchronously if there are too many "I didn't understand" or "Alternative solution:" comments
- Chat, screen-sharing, in person
- Post a follow-up comment summarizing the discussion.
-
If you learned something new, share your appreciation
- "I did not know about this. Thank you for sharing it."
-
Avoid the "since you're at it" attitude
- If you would like to recommend a code change unrelated to the current pull request, suggest it in the appropriate place or open a ticket for it (on Trello, JIRA, GitHub project...)
-
Be grateful for the reviewer's suggestions
- "Good call. I'll make that change."
-
Be aware that it can be challenging to convey emotion and intention online
- You may want to consider using labels to convey intention and tone.
-
Explain why the code exists
- "It's like that because of these reasons. Would it be more clear if I rename this class/file/method/variable?"
-
Extract some changes and refactoring into future tickets/stories
-
When making visual changes, include screenshots or screencasts to show the effect of the changes
- You may want to consider before/after screenshots or screencasts whenever applicable.
-
Link to the code review from the ticket/story
- "Ready for review: https://github.com/organization/project/pull/1"
-
Push commits based on earlier rounds of feedback as isolated commits to the branch
- Do not squash until the branch is ready to merge.
- Reviewers should be able to read individual updates based on their earlier feedback.
-
Seek to understand the reviewer's perspective
-
Try to respond to every comment
-
Wait to merge the branch until continuous integration tells you the test suite is green in the branch
- TDDium, Travis CI, CircleCI, GitHub Actions, etc.
-
Merge once you feel confident in the code and its impact on the project
-
Final editorial control rests with the pull request author
-
Recognize the work of your teammates when you are pairing
- Use
Co-Authored-By: <name> <email>
at the end of your commit message.
- Use
Understand why the change is necessary (fixes a bug, improves the user experience, refactors the existing code).
Then:
-
Communicate which ideas you feel strongly about and those you don't
-
Identify ways to simplify the code while still solving the problem
-
If discussions turn too philosophical or academic, move the discussion offline to a regular Friday afternoon technique discussion
- In the meantime, let the author make the final decision on alternative implementations.
-
Offer alternative implementations
- But assume the author already considered them.
- "What do you think about using a custom validator here?"
-
Seek to understand the author's perspective
-
Approve the pull request
-
Remember that you are here to provide feedback, not to be a gatekeeper
-
When suggesting changes using the "Add a suggestion" feature:
- Communicate clearly which lines you suggest adding/removing
- Test the suggested changes to validate it works whenever possible
- When not possible, let the pull request author know that you did not test the suggestion
- Provide some context to let the author know why you're suggesting the change
Reviewers should comment on missed style guidelines. Example comment:
> Order resourceful routes alphabetically by name.
An example response to style comments:
Whoops. Good catch, thanks. Fixed in a4994ec.
If you disagree with a guideline, open an issue on the guides repo rather than debating it within the code review. In the meantime, apply the guideline. It's often helpful to set up a linter like standard to format code automatically.
This helps us have more meaningful conversations on PRs rather than debating personal style preferences.
- Leave one comment only, for multiple stylistic offenses of the same kind
- If there are a few occurrences of the same change needed, do not leave multiple comments for the same change, rather suggest running the linter, and/or leave one comment only, mentioning the line and elsewhere, as long as the other files are being edited in the pull request.