CRV2 CodeReviewAgile - Revision history

Carlos Pantelides at 14:49, 21 May 2014

2014-05-21T14:49:14Z

Show changes

Johanna Curiel at 01:31, 6 December 2013

2013-12-06T01:31:25Z

Johanna Curiel at 01:25, 6 December 2013

2013-12-06T01:25:39Z

Johanna Curiel at 01:02, 6 December 2013

2013-12-06T01:02:50Z

Johanna Curiel at 01:02, 6 December 2013

2013-12-06T01:02:16Z

Carlos Pantelides at 23:03, 5 December 2013

2013-12-05T23:03:41Z

Carlos Pantelides at 01:33, 17 October 2013

2013-10-17T01:33:44Z

Carlos Pantelides at 00:26, 14 September 2013

2013-09-14T00:26:51Z

Carlos Pantelides at 05:46, 12 July 2013

2013-07-12T05:46:10Z

Carlos Pantelides at 05:41, 12 July 2013

2013-07-12T05:41:56Z

@@ Line 22: / Line 22: @@
 ====Integrating Code Review in pair programming methodology====
-This are some simple steps on how to integrate code reviews in pair programming:
+These are some simple steps on how to integrate code reviews in pair programming:
 *Determine the frequency of the review
-*Be aware that you can review code at different levels such as functionalities and security
+*Be aware that you can review code at different levels such as functional and security
 *Use OWASP guidelines such as Code review to look for security vulnerabilities in the code
 *Use automated tools that can facilitate the code review process (for example OWASP O2 is a great tool for .NET C# developers)
-*Do not wait till the end to execute a Code review, ideally this process should be part of every feedback loop
+*Do not wait till the end to execute a Code review, ideally this process should be part of every feedback loop or at least integrated in a cycle during the feedback loop. It might cost a lot more to fix issues if code review is left at the end
 ===Peer Review===

← Older revision		Revision as of 01:25, 6 December 2013
Line 19:		Line 19:

	This technique is quite controversial, but when it is adopted it has the benefits of making better code, as there is one programmer supervising cooperatively the other one's work. If both programmers know this guide, they will apply it continuously.		This technique is quite controversial, but when it is adopted it has the benefits of making better code, as there is one programmer supervising cooperatively the other one's work. If both programmers know this guide, they will apply it continuously.
		+	In pair program there are 2 roles, the programmer (pig) and the supervisor (chicken). Basically, what the supervisor does is control the work of the programmer. In this process, a code review might be part of it and it can be easily integrated since the major responsibility of the supervisor is to regulate the programmer’s work.
		+
		+	====Integrating Code Review in pair programming methodology====
		+	This are some simple steps on how to integrate code reviews in pair programming:
		+	*Determine the frequency of the review
		+	*Be aware that you can review code at different levels such as functionalities and security
		+	*Use OWASP guidelines such as Code review to look for security vulnerabilities in the code
		+	*Use automated tools that can facilitate the code review process (for example OWASP O2 is a great tool for .NET C# developers)
		+	*Do not wait till the end to execute a Code review, ideally this process should be part of every feedback loop

	===Peer Review===		===Peer Review===

@@ Line 4: / Line 4: @@
 ==Some definitions about Agile==
-The Agile name is an umbrella for quite a lot of practices that range from programming, to testing, to project management and everything in between. There are many flavours of agile, perhaps as many as practicioners. It is like an heretogeneous reference framework and you are free to use what you want.
+The Agile name is an umbrella for quite a lot of practices that range from programming, to testing, to project management and everything in between. There are many flavors of agile, perhaps as many as practitioners. It is like an heterogeneous reference framework and you are free to use what you want.
 Agile has some key practices that could affect the way the code is reviewed. First, when the review is done and then, the code itself.

@@ Line 8: / Line 8: @@
 Agile has some key practices that could affect the way the code is reviewed. First, when the review is done and then, the code itself.
-Agile Development is well suited for code review, as two of its practices are "pair programming" and "peer review". AD incorporates code review in itself, in what traditionally was seem as another phase.
+Agile Development(AD) is well suited for code review, as two of its practices are "pair programming" and "peer review". AD incorporates code review in itself, in what traditionally was seem as another phase.
 ===Life Cycle===

@@ Line 8: / Line 8: @@
 Agile has some key practices that could affect the way the code is reviewed. First, when the review is done and then, the code itself.
-Agile Development is well suited for code review, as two of its practices are "pair programming" and "peer review". AD incorporates code review in theirself, in what traditionally was seem as another phase.
+Agile Development is well suited for code review, as two of its practices are "pair programming" and "peer review". AD incorporates code review in itself, in what traditionally was seem as another phase.
 ===Life Cycle===
@@ Line 14: / Line 14: @@
 Agile blurs the difference between developing and testing, and so does with code review. It is not an external activity. Agile tries to keep the code testing and review as near as possible to the development phase, there is no such thing as the develop, test, code review cycle.
-It is a common practice to define short development cycles. At the end of each one, all the code must be production quality code. It can be incomplete, but it must add some value. That affects the review process as it must be continuous.
+It is a common practice to define short development cycles. At the end of each one, all the code must be production quality code. Its funtionality may be incomplete, but it must add some value. That affects the review process as it must be continuous.
 ===Pair Programming===
@@ Line 24: / Line 24: @@
 This one is enforced by the usage of tools like Jenkins that ask another user for a code review before commiting to the versioning system.
-The role of testers...
+===???===
 ===Clean Code and "Smells"===
-The agile community is very committed to code quality...
+The agile community is very committed to code quality. A by product is the concept of Clean Code and its smells, its very handy to be familiar with this topic, ...
 ==The Agile Ecosystem==
@@ Line 44: / Line 46: @@
 ==Code Reviewing an Agile Project==
-If you are going to review an Agile Team project code, the best thing that you can do is give this guide to that Team as early as possible and most of your work will be done for you. Or better yet, integrate to the Team.
+If you are going to review an Agile Team project code, the best thing that you can do is give this guide to that Team as early as possible and most of your work will be done for you. Or better yet, integrate yourself to the Team.
 Code review must be done at least at the end of every user story and be very fast in order to not introduce delays and detect any error as soon as possible. It's better to do that in every commit to the code repository. That is the reason that peer review is the prefered method for agile code review. Nevertheless, as security review requieres some extra specialization, perhaps the best way is to integrate the security code reviewier with the Team.
@@ Line 78: / Line 80: @@
 ===Continuous integration===
-it triggers the tests and often static code analysis too. It makes integration problems arise very quickly.

@@ Line 6: / Line 6: @@
 The Agile name is an umbrella for quite a lot of practices that range from programming, to testing, to project management and everything in between. There are many flavours of agile, perhaps as many as practicioners. It is like an heretogeneous reference framework and you are free to use what you want.
-Agile has some key practices that could affect the way the code is reviewed. First, when the review is done and then the code itself.
+Agile has some key practices that could affect the way the code is reviewed. First, when the review is done and then, the code itself.
-Agile Development is well suited for code review, as two of its practices are "pair programming" and "peer review". AD incorporates code review in itself, in what traditionally was seem as another phase.
+Agile Development is well suited for code review, as two of its practices are "pair programming" and "peer review". AD incorporates code review in theirself, in what traditionally was seem as another phase.
 ===Life Cycle===
-Agile blurs the difference between developing and testing, and so does with code review. It is not an external activity. Agile tries to keep the code testing and review as near as possible to the development phase, there is no such thing as the "develop, test, code review cycle.
+Agile blurs the difference between developing and testing, and so does with code review. It is not an external activity. Agile tries to keep the code testing and review as near as possible to the development phase, there is no such thing as the develop, test, code review cycle.
-Its a common practice to define short development cycles. At the end of each one, all the code must be production quality code. It can be incomplete, but it must add some value. That affects the review process, it must be continuous.
+It is a common practice to define short development cycles. At the end of each one, all the code must be production quality code. It can be incomplete, but it must add some value. That affects the review process as it must be continuous.
 ===Pair Programming===
-This technique is quite controversial, but when its adopted it has the benefits of making better code, as there is one programmer supervising cooperatively the other one's work. If both programmers know this guide, they will apply it continuously.
+This technique is quite controversial, but when it is adopted it has the benefits of making better code, as there is one programmer supervising cooperatively the other one's work. If both programmers know this guide, they will apply it continuously.
 ===Peer Review===
@@ Line 44: / Line 44: @@
 ==Code Reviewing an Agile Project==
-If you are going to review an Agile Team project code, the best thing that you can do is give this guide to that Team as early as possible and most of your work will be done for you.
+If you are going to review an Agile Team project code, the best thing that you can do is give this guide to that Team as early as possible and most of your work will be done for you. Or better yet, integrate to the Team.
-Code review must be done at least at the end of every story and be very fast in order to not introduce delays and detect any error as soon as possible. It's better to do that in every commit to the code repository. That is the reason that peer review is the prefered method for agile code review. Nevertheless, as security review requieres some extra specialization, perhaps the best way is to integrate the security code reviewier with the Team.
+Code review must be done at least at the end of every user story and be very fast in order to not introduce delays and detect any error as soon as possible. It's better to do that in every commit to the code repository. That is the reason that peer review is the prefered method for agile code review. Nevertheless, as security review requieres some extra specialization, perhaps the best way is to integrate the security code reviewier with the Team.
 ==Tests==
@@ Line 87: / Line 87: @@
 ===The XDD===
-There are many agile practices related to what drivens the development of a project, what they have in common is that they could generate testing code. As a security practicioner, there are two aspects of interest. One, sometimes useful is called "test coverage" and it is automatically calculated. 100% code coverage does not mean a good coverage neither a 60% a bad one. It is very difficult to measure the second aspect, the quality
+There are many agile practices related to what drives the development of a project, what they have in common is that they could generate testing code. As a security practicioner, there are two aspects of interest. One, sometimes useful is called "test coverage" and it is automatically calculated. 100% code coverage does not mean a good coverage neither a 60% a bad one. It is very difficult to measure the second aspect, the quality
 of the test. There is possitive testing, that aims at the added value of every piece of software and negative testing, related to bugs and security.
@@ Line 100: / Line 100: @@
 ====Behavior Driven Development====
-This practice builds upon TDD, providing an interface to non specialists users, shaping the tests around full blown scenarios. As TDD, it generates testing code.
+This practice builds upon TDD, providing an interface to non-specialists users, shaping the tests around full blown scenarios. As TDD, it generates testing code.
 ====Domain Driven Design====
-This practice consist of... It does not generate code itself, but the architecture.
+This practice consist of... It does not generate code itself, but the architecture. It is very popular among the Agile people, so it is very important to be familiar with. Perhaps the most useful concept is "ubiquitous language".
 ===Refactoring===

@@ Line 22: / Line 22: @@
 ===Peer Review===
-This one is enforced by the usage of tools like .... that ask another user for a code review before commiting to the versioning system.
+This one is enforced by the usage of tools like ¿Jenkins? that ask another user for a code review before commiting to the versioning system.
-The role of testers
+The role of testers...
@@ Line 30: / Line 30: @@
 ===Clean Code and "Smells"===
 ==The Agile Ecosystem==
@@ Line 50: / Line 52: @@
 In order to review an Agile Project, you will have to extend the review to the tests.
-Are there enough tests?
+*Are there enough tests?
+*Is the code covered by the tests? Code coverage measure main value is to find unused code.
-Is the code covered by the tests? Code coverage measure main value is to find unused code.
+*Are there the trivial tests? They are as needed as any other test.
+*Are there commented out tests? Commented out tests means that some one made a test that the code could not pass or take a long time to run.
-Are there the trivial tests? They are as needed as any other test.
+*Are boundary conditions tested? These are the tests around maximum and minimum values or near a change in a condition.
+*Are bugs exhaustively tested? That is, is an off-by-one bug is found, are there boundary tests for that condition?
-Are there commented out tests? Commented out tests means that some one made a test that the code could not pass or take a long time to run.
+*Are the test automatic? If the tests requiere manual intervention, they will not be run.
+*Do the tests conform to F.I.R.S.T.?
    Fast: a slow test is a candidate for removal, as it slows down the "make test, implement, test, refactor" cycle.
    Independent: one test can not depend on the execution of another one, the order should not matter.
@@ Line 88: / Line 82: @@
 ===The role of automatic static code analysis in the Agile Methodologies===
 ===The XDD===

@@ Line 67: / Line 67: @@
    Fast: a slow test is a candidate for removal, as it slows down the "make test, implement, test, refactor" cycle.
    Independent: one test can not depend on the execution of another one, the order should not matter.
    Repeatable: one test should give always the same result in any environment if nothing has changed in the code.
    Self-validating: the result of a test should be Pass or Fail, nothing else. There should not be any manual intervention needed.
    Timely: the test should be written before the code. That can not be detected with code review, but you can always see the logs of the versioning system.
@@ Line 104: / Line 100: @@
 TDD is the practice of making the test before coding, it is the extremme application of the "test early" principle. The idea is that the code always will be tested as the test predates the code itself. A very important side effect is that it forces to simplify the code to make it testeable. It could be very low level with very isolated components, called "unit testing" and high level, when it tests clusters of interrelated components, called "functional testing".
-To read more about code coverage: https://www.owasp.org/index.php/Code_Review_Coverage
+To read more about code coverage: [https://www.owasp.org/index.php/Code_Review_Coverage]
 ====Behavior Driven Development====
@@ Line 112: / Line 108: @@
 ====Domain Driven Design====
-This practice consist of... It does not generate code, but high level patterns.
+This practice consist of... It does not generate code itself, but patterns.
 ===Refactoring===