Changes for page Peer reviews
Last modified by Danniar Firdausy on 2024/09/18 14:42
From version 22.6
edited by Danniar Firdausy
on 2024/09/18 14:40
on 2024/09/18 14:40
Change comment:
There is no comment for this version
To version 16.2
edited by Erik Bakker
on 2022/06/10 10:39
on 2022/06/10 10:39
Change comment:
Update document after refactoring.
Summary
-
Page properties (4 modified, 0 added, 0 removed)
Details
- Page properties
-
- Title
-
... ... @@ -1,1 +1,1 @@ 1 - Peers1 +intermediate-devops-perspectives-peerreview - Author
-
... ... @@ -1,1 +1,1 @@ 1 -XWiki. dfirdausy1 +XWiki.ebakker - Default language
-
... ... @@ -1,1 +1,0 @@ 1 -en - Content
-
... ... @@ -1,9 +1,13 @@ 1 1 {{container}}{{container layoutStyle="columns"}}((( 2 += Running peer reviews inside eMagiz DevOps team = 2 2 3 - Welcome to this microlearning session on peer reviews with eMagiz.In this microlearning, we willexplore how peer reviews can enhancethe quality of your integrationsolutions on the eMagizplatform. We will cover essential prerequisites,keyconcepts,and practicaltips for runningeffective peer reviews.Whether you are new to peer reviews or looking to refine yourprocess, this session will provide valuable insights to help you and your team achieve higher quality and consistency.4 +In this microlearning, we will take a look at peer reviews for eMagiz. 4 4 5 5 Should you have any questions, please contact [[academy@emagiz.com>>mailto:academy@emagiz.com]]. 6 6 8 +* Last update: April 22nd, 2021 9 +* Required reading time: 8 minutes 10 + 7 7 == 1. Prerequisites == 8 8 9 9 * Basic knowledge of the eMagiz platform ... ... @@ -10,15 +10,11 @@ 10 10 11 11 == 2. Key concepts == 12 12 13 - ByPeer reviews,wemean: A disciplined engineering practice for detecting and correcting defects in software artifacts and preventing their leakage into production.17 +Peer reviews are defined as follows: A disciplined engineering practice for detecting and correcting defects in software artifacts and preventing their leakage into production. Its a well known and working concept with IT organization, and it can definetely applied in DevOps teams that have eMagiz as one of the technology pillars. In tbe context of eMagiz, peer reviews are done usually after the Create phase. 14 14 15 -== 3. Running peer reviews in eMagiz == 16 - 17 -Peer reviews is a well known and working concept with IT organization, and it can definetely applied in DevOps teams that have eMagiz as one of the technology pillars. 18 - 19 19 [[image:Main.Images.Microlearning.WebHome@intermediate-devops-perspectives-peerreview-1.png]] 20 20 21 -Key benefits of peer reviews :21 +Key benefits of peer reviews 22 22 23 23 * Improved quality of integrations 24 24 * Higher consistency ... ... @@ -27,13 +27,11 @@ 27 27 * Architecture challenge and verification 28 28 * Find alternative solutions 29 29 30 -=== 3.1 Who and when === 31 31 32 -Doing peer reviews increases the quality of the delivered work by the team. This means it is the whole team's responsibility to ensure peer reviews are performed. Following that logic, asking different individuals within your team for other peer reviews makes sense. 33 33 34 - Asdescribedbelow,peer reviewsshould be conducted for every critical decisionwhen building an integration solution via the eMagizplatform. See section 3.3 for a detailed list.32 +== 3. Running peer reviews in eMagiz == 35 35 36 -=== 3. 2Considerations for reviewee ===34 +=== 3.1 Considerations for reviewee === 37 37 38 38 Here are some things to keep in mind when presenting the work to peer review. 39 39 ... ... @@ -40,71 +40,79 @@ 40 40 * Quickly explain the story / task / background 41 41 * Quickly show the working result if applicable / practical 42 42 * Talk through the solution while showing the models / code 43 - * *Just trying to explain your work to someone else will help spot mistakes44 - * *Don’t show every single detail but try to highlight the important parts and/or details you’re less sure about. This takes time and experience to get “right” and is different depending on the story, the reviewee, the reviewer, the project, etc.41 + * Just trying to explain your work to someone else will help spot mistakes 42 + * Don’t show every single detail but try to highlight the important parts and/or details you’re less sure about. This takes time and experience to get “right” and is different depending on the story, the reviewee, the reviewer, the project, etc. 45 45 * Always do a peer review, no exceptions. Making assumptions about the usefulness beforehand defeats the whole purpose. 46 46 47 -=== 3. 3Considerations for reviewer ===45 +=== 3.2 Considerations for reviewer === 48 48 49 49 Here are some things to keep in mind when peer reviewing the work . 50 50 51 51 * Ask questions 52 - * *How does this work?53 - * *Why did you decide to …?54 - * *Did you think about …?50 + * How does this work? 51 + * Why did you decide to …? 52 + * Did you think about …? 55 55 * Spot (incorrect) assumptions 56 56 * Check application of best practices – see next slide 57 - * *Modelling / coding patterns58 - * *Naming conventions59 - * *Errors / warnings55 + * Modelling / coding patterns 56 + * Naming conventions 57 + * Errors / warnings 60 60 * Notice non-standard / unusual / abnormal things 61 - * *Make sure this is documented, mainly for future changes. Annotations are very useful here.59 + * Make sure this is documented, mainly for future changes. Annotations are very useful here. 62 62 63 63 === 3.3 Peer review items per ILM Phase === 64 64 65 65 * Capture 66 - * *100% filled67 - * *Connection method clear68 - * *Authentication method clear69 - * *Definitions loaded70 - * *Sizing impact understood and valid64 + * 100% filled 65 + * Connection method clear 66 + * Authentication method clear 67 + * Definitions loaded 68 + * Sizing impact understood and valid 71 71 * Design 72 - * *Check solution architecture validity73 - * *Design 100% filled and clear74 - * *CDM Root entity mapped75 - * *Set as mapped – avoid line mapping76 - * *Use annotation where possible77 - * *Proper flow and system settings70 + * Check solution architecture validity 71 + * Design 100% filled and clear 72 + * CDM Root entity mapped 73 + * Set as mapped – avoid line mapping 74 + * Use annotation where possible 75 + * Proper flow and system settings 78 78 * Create 79 - * *Validate routing80 - * *Generic error response flows81 - * *Check naming conventions flows, properties and XSD82 - * *Split messages in on-ramp – not later77 + * Validate routing 78 + * Generic error response flows 79 + * Check naming conventions flows, properties and XSD 80 + * Split messages in on-ramp – not later 83 83 * Deploy 84 - * *Check properties85 - * *Avoid too many different flow versions – max. 286 - * *Remove test packages that are deployed82 + * Check properties 83 + * Avoid too many different flow versions – max. 2 84 + * Remove test packages that are deployed 87 87 * Manage 88 - * *All alerts mapped to Customer Support89 - * *All messages can be explained90 - * *Avoid code mappings91 - * *Enable default alerts86 + * All alerts mapped to Customer Support 87 + * All messages can be explained 88 + * Avoid code mappings 89 + * Enable default alerts 92 92 * Architecture 93 - * *Deploy connector close to the source/target system94 - * *Ensure ACCP and PROD are exact copies95 - * *Cloud over on-premise96 - * *No hard-coded variable – use properties91 + * Deploy connector close to the source/target system 92 + * Ensure ACCP and PROD are exact copies 93 + * Cloud over on-premise 94 + * No hard-coded variable – use properties 97 97 98 -== 4. Key takeaways == 99 99 97 + 98 +== 4. Assignment == 99 + 100 +See how peer reviews are currently implemented within the projects on which you work to see if you can learn something from the information you have gathered via this microlearning. 101 + 102 +== 5. Key takeaways == 103 + 100 100 Peer reviews are instrumental in any DevOps team. Use the provided list as your team's peer review starting point and tune as you go along. 101 101 102 -== 5. Suggested Additional Readings == 103 103 104 -You will find plenty background items available on the Internet. If you are interested in this topic within the eMagiz platform, please see the following link: 105 105 106 -* [[Crash Courses (Menu)>>doc:Main.eMagiz Academy.Microlearnings.Crash Course.WebHome||target="blank"]] 107 -** [[Crash Course Platform (Navigation)>>doc:Main.eMagiz Academy.Microlearnings.Crash Course.Crash Course Platform.WebHome||target="blank"]] 108 -*** [[The five phases of eMagiz (Explanation)>>doc:Main.eMagiz Academy.Microlearnings.Crash Course.Crash Course Platform.crashcourse-platform-intro-the-five-phases-of-emagiz||target="blank"]] 109 -* [[Peer Review (Search Results)>>url:https://docs.emagiz.com/bin/view/Main/Search?sort=score&sortOrder=desc&highlight=true&facet=true&r=1&f_space_facet=0%2FMain.&l_space_facet=10&f_type=DOCUMENT&f_locale=en&f_locale=&f_locale=en&text=%22peer+review%22||target="blank"]] 108 +== 6. Suggested Additional Readings == 109 + 110 +You will find plenty background items available on the Internet. 111 + 112 +== 7. Silent demonstration video == 113 + 114 +As this is a more theoretical microlearning we have no video for this. 115 + 110 110 )))((({{toc/}}))){{/container}}{{/container}}