DueDates v1.1: A Pre-Release Review
| Posted on Saturday, November 01, 2008 |
0
commentsAdd comments |
This week I was provided the opportunity to review the DueDates-Yellow project designed by John Ly and John Zhou. Likewise, with a DueDates-Silver v1.1 being released soon, Scheller Sanchez and Tyler Wolff, the project leads for DueDates-Gold, were asked to review our project.
Google Code Reviews
This review process was easier to do in regards to using Google’s project review system via Issue Tracking and branching of the project versus creating a wiki page and then needing to locate all the review comments throughout the various code files. While there were a few issues with locating comments using the updated methodology, there were only a few places that one would expect to find those entries.
Reviewing DueDates-Yellow
Overall, the code style and implementation for DueDates-Yellow is fine. However, its biggest issue, in my opinion, is that the problem space has not been abstracted at the necessary level to manage maintenance and ease the implementation of future development objectives. There are several instances of similar branching structures and class definitions which provide the opportunity to abstact the problem space further. I tried to provide a constructive, objective review of DueDates-Yellow without being overly critical of the project’s implementation.
DueDates-Silver v1.1 Review
Scheller and Tyler provided very good comments. Most of their comments dealt with details, but very important ones. Several good catches included the lack of information stating that Java 6 or higher is needed, and that the QA instructions have been missing since v1.0.
For the most part, it seems that Tyler was very impressed with our implementation and project structure. In particular, he thought that all DueDates projects should be required to include an XML repository to hold the library data for the application. I would have to say he paid our project one of the highest compliments one developer can give to another:
”Your groups project is the real deal. I think if the class ever merges to one project we should merge to this version.”
Future Reviews
There’s not much I would do differently to do future reviews. The improved Review Issue tracking mechanism on Google Code has much improved the process. The only change would be to have a better understanding of where the review comments go upon completion.
Google Code Reviews
This review process was easier to do in regards to using Google’s project review system via Issue Tracking and branching of the project versus creating a wiki page and then needing to locate all the review comments throughout the various code files. While there were a few issues with locating comments using the updated methodology, there were only a few places that one would expect to find those entries.
Reviewing DueDates-Yellow
Overall, the code style and implementation for DueDates-Yellow is fine. However, its biggest issue, in my opinion, is that the problem space has not been abstracted at the necessary level to manage maintenance and ease the implementation of future development objectives. There are several instances of similar branching structures and class definitions which provide the opportunity to abstact the problem space further. I tried to provide a constructive, objective review of DueDates-Yellow without being overly critical of the project’s implementation.
DueDates-Silver v1.1 Review
Scheller and Tyler provided very good comments. Most of their comments dealt with details, but very important ones. Several good catches included the lack of information stating that Java 6 or higher is needed, and that the QA instructions have been missing since v1.0.
For the most part, it seems that Tyler was very impressed with our implementation and project structure. In particular, he thought that all DueDates projects should be required to include an XML repository to hold the library data for the application. I would have to say he paid our project one of the highest compliments one developer can give to another:
”Your groups project is the real deal. I think if the class ever merges to one project we should merge to this version.”
Future Reviews
There’s not much I would do differently to do future reviews. The improved Review Issue tracking mechanism on Google Code has much improved the process. The only change would be to have a better understanding of where the review comments go upon completion.
