Difference between revisions of "Steps and Roles"

Revision as of 11:37, 29 June 2006

Steps

Code reviews consist of the following four steps:

1. Initialization
2. Preparation
3. Meeting
4. Corrections

Roles

Code reviews are carried out by personnel in four roles: author, moderator, reader, and recorder. Depending on the size of your inspection team and the formality of your inspection process, some people may serve in multiple roles at the same time. However, if you have a large enough team, it is useful to assign each role to a different person so each person can focus on their duties.

1. Moderator: The Moderator is the key role in a code review. The moderator is responsible for selecting a team of reviewers, scheduling the code review meeting, conducting the meeting, and working with the author to ensure that necessary corrections are made to the reviewed document.
2. Author: The Author wrote the code that is being reviewed. The author is responsible for starting the code review process by finding a Moderator. The role of Author must be separated from that of Moderator, Reader, or Recorder to ensure the objectivity and effectiveness of the code review. However, the Author serves an essential role in answering questions and making clarifications during the review and making corrections after the review.
3. Reader: The Reader presents the code during the meeting by paraphrasing it in his own words. It's important to separate the role of Reader from Author, because it's too easy for an author to explain what he meant the code to do instead of explaining what it actually does. The reader's interpretation of the code can reveal ambiguities, hidden assumptions, poor documentation and style, and other errors that the Author would not be likely to catch on his own.
4. Scribe: The Scribe records all issues raised during the code review. Separating the role of Scribe from the other roles allows the other reviewers to focus their entire attention on the code.