Lecture Notes (iv)

Peer review

1.Peer review:(peer Review) is an inspection method that verifies defects and needs to change areas through the author's peers. Specific products that require peer review are identified during the definition of the project software process and are scheduled as part of the software development plan.

· Requires pre-preparation, planning, and time schedule

· As soon as possible.

1, the role of peer review: · Early detection of defects; · removal of defects; · reduce costs; • Improve quality.

2, peer review of the type: · Formal inspection: (inspection) The most stringent, requires a standardized process,

The participants have been formally trained;

· Technical review: (technique Review) Comparison of technical solutions, adjudication

For the purpose, the degree of rigor is between regular inspection and the daytime;

· Daytime: (Walk Through) the most (free) loose form, no process requirements, there is a review team, the review process is not required.

3. General review process steps (formal inspection process):

 

4. Planning stage:

· The project leader designates the organizer; • Author self-inspection work products; Organizers plan this review;

· Check ingress guidelines: Do you conform to document standards? Have you checked with the tool? Code <=500 line;

Document <=40 page;

· Prepare the Review package: Work product (HLD), reference (srs- Check consistency), review form (Reviewform), checklist ( Checklist).

· Appoint a review expert (3-6 person);

· The organizer sends the review package, the review notice to the relevant person.

5. INTRODUCTION Meeting:

· The object of being judged adopts new technology and method. The subject is evaluated for the first time (the author introduces the subject and related technology)

· The review expert first participates in the Review à (the reviewer introduces the review process)

· The presentation of the meeting is more than 5 hours from the time of receiving the review notice;

· The meeting time is not more than 1 hours,30-60 between the appropriate, attention to explain.

6. Preparation stage: (most important, most defects found)

· Review expert individual to complete the work product review, put forward defects;

· The preparation time is greater than the meeting time and should commence 2 days before the meeting;

· Reviewers receive the review package from the organizer, review the work products, identify defects, fill out the review form, and feedback the review form to the organizer;

Organizer: Check the review form, decide whether to increase the evaluation of the assessment of the input (increase the preparation time; increase the number of experts; Change the review experts)

7, the meeting stage (within2 hours; only ask questions, not concerned about the resolution):

· The organizer holds a review meeting;

· The instructor explains the work product; (try not to be the author concurrently)

· We jointly identify the problem (the issue recorded in the review form; problems found at the meeting; When the dispute is not
The organizer shall make a decision)

· (a) to classify identified issues;

· The author decides whether to convene a third-hour meeting;

· The Recorder records all questions and classifications and sends them to the organizer; (The recorder should try not to be held by the author or the organizer)

· The Organizer updates the review form.

8. Third hour meeting

· Controversial issues continue to be discussed and resolutions given;

· Discussion of solutions to problems;

· The Organizer updates the review form.

9, Rework: Send back to the author modification;

10, Tracking:

· Summarize all necessary data to the review form and send it to the relevant review experts;

· The organization review expert confirms that the defects have been modified and has not introduced new defects;

· Assist organizer to confirm that the relevant issues have been correctly modified and that no new defects have been introduced;

· Verify that the relevant measurement data in the review form is correct (number of defects found; review input time; number of experts)

Lecture Notes (iv)