Skip to Content

Wiki source code of Peer reviews

Version 22.1 by Eva Torken on 2023/08/23 13:51
Show last authors
1 {{container}}{{container layoutStyle="columns"}}(((
2 In this microlearning, we will take a look at peer reviews for eMagiz.
3
4 Should you have any questions, please contact [[academy@emagiz.com>>mailto:academy@emagiz.com]].
5
6 == 1. Prerequisites ==
7
8 * Basic knowledge of the eMagiz platform
9
10 == 2. Key concepts ==
11
12 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.
13
14 [[image:Main.Images.Microlearning.WebHome@intermediate-devops-perspectives-peerreview-1.png]]
15
16 Key benefits of peer reviews
17
18 * Improved quality of integrations
19 * Higher consistency
20 * Knowledge sharing
21 * Keeping standards for optimal maintenance
22 * Architecture challenge and verification
23 * Find alternative solutions
24
25 == 3. Running peer reviews in eMagiz ==
26
27 === 3.1 Who and when ===
28
29 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.
30
31 As described below, peer reviews should be conducted for every critical decision when building an integration solution via the eMagiz platform. See section 3.3 for a detailed list.
32
33 === 3.2 Considerations for reviewee ===
34
35 Here are some things to keep in mind when presenting the work to peer review.
36
37 * Quickly explain the story / task / background
38 * Quickly show the working result if applicable / practical
39 * Talk through the solution while showing the models / code
40 ** Just trying to explain your work to someone else will help spot mistakes
41 ** 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.
42 * Always do a peer review, no exceptions. Making assumptions about the usefulness beforehand defeats the whole purpose.
43
44 === 3.3 Considerations for reviewer ===
45
46 Here are some things to keep in mind when peer reviewing the work .
47
48 * Ask questions
49 ** How does this work?
50 ** Why did you decide to …?
51 ** Did you think about …?
52 * Spot (incorrect) assumptions
53 * Check application of best practices – see next slide
54 ** Modelling / coding patterns
55 ** Naming conventions
56 ** Errors / warnings
57 * Notice non-standard / unusual / abnormal things
58 ** Make sure this is documented, mainly for future changes. Annotations are very useful here.
59
60 === 3.3 Peer review items per ILM Phase ===
61
62 * Capture
63 ** 100% filled
64 ** Connection method clear
65 ** Authentication method clear
66 ** Definitions loaded
67 ** Sizing impact understood and valid
68 * Design
69 ** Check solution architecture validity
70 ** Design 100% filled and clear
71 ** CDM Root entity mapped
72 ** Set as mapped – avoid line mapping
73 ** Use annotation where possible
74 ** Proper flow and system settings
75 * Create
76 ** Validate routing
77 ** Generic error response flows
78 ** Check naming conventions flows, properties and XSD
79 ** Split messages in on-ramp – not later
80 * Deploy
81 ** Check properties
82 ** Avoid too many different flow versions – max. 2
83 ** Remove test packages that are deployed
84 * Manage
85 ** All alerts mapped to Customer Support
86 ** All messages can be explained
87 ** Avoid code mappings
88 ** Enable default alerts
89 * Architecture
90 ** Deploy connector close to the source/target system
91 ** Ensure ACCP and PROD are exact copies
92 ** Cloud over on-premise
93 ** No hard-coded variable – use properties
94
95 == 4. Key takeaways ==
96
97 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.
98
99 == 5. Suggested Additional Readings ==
100
101 You will find plenty background items available on the Internet.
102
103 )))((({{toc/}}))){{/container}}{{/container}}