summaryrefslogtreecommitdiff
diff options
context:
space:
mode:
authorMarin Jankovski <marin@gitlab.com>2019-09-03 14:47:37 +0000
committerAsh McKenzie <amckenzie@gitlab.com>2019-09-04 10:57:10 +1000
commit53275ad1a2d168f946b563dcee97610a358ec26d (patch)
tree9fa36053261ccc56fb68cb56bb2662753766d883
parent7b98bbf6095d41e427f726a0f9d56a19a0159f6a (diff)
downloadgitlab-ce-mj/code-review-avoid.tar.gz
What to avoid in code reviewmj/code-review-avoid
-rw-r--r--doc/development/code_review.md9
1 files changed, 7 insertions, 2 deletions
diff --git a/doc/development/code_review.md b/doc/development/code_review.md
index 80890d96159..bcfc0734c06 100644
--- a/doc/development/code_review.md
+++ b/doc/development/code_review.md
@@ -116,8 +116,13 @@ warrant a comment could be:
- Any benchmarking performed to complement the change
- Potentially insecure code
-Do not add these comments directly to the source code, unless the
-reviewer requires you to do so.
+Avoid:
+
+- Adding comments (referenced above, or TODO items) directly to the source code unless the reviewer requires you to do so. If the comments are added due to an actionable task,
+a link to an issue must be included.
+- Assigning merge requests with failed tests to maintainers. If the tests are failing and you have to assign, ensure you leave a comment with an explanation.
+- Excessively mentioning maintainers through email or Slack (if the maintainer is reachable
+through Slack). If you can't assign a merge request, `@` mentioning a maintainer in a comment is acceptable and in all other cases assigning the merge request is sufficient.
This
[saves reviewers time and helps authors catch mistakes earlier](https://www.ibm.com/developerworks/rational/library/11-proven-practices-for-peer-review/index.html#__RefHeading__97_174136755).