Mike, thanks for the article. I can't agree more, more eyes == less bugs.
To show some choice to the readers, I'd like to add that Gerrit is (IMHO) much superior for the code review process than GitHub pull requests. It is also free (both as in speech and as in beer), can be hosted internally, and there are already public SaaS allowing to use it, for example GerritHub.
Surely it has its twist for a git workflow it requires, and takes some time to get used to, but it really pays off IMO.
As for another set of tips for code review, take a look here (and immediately figure out what project I'm involved in :) )
Also, one must CI all things. Manual testing is flawed because it is 'manual', and humans are fallible. Have a decent unit test suit, a functional test suit and (if being a part of a bigger picture) an integration test suit - and run them automatically at least before merging, but better on each iteration, and let the CI vote on changes too.
Thanks Pavlo, I have not heard of Gerrit before. Will check it out! I like that Github has improved their code review stuff recently, coupled with all the other fab features it just seemlessly fits into many peoples current development processes, but its great to have alternatives! Just glad we are not back in the days where we had to do it on paper or word! Thanks for the other article too!
We're a place where coders share, stay up-to-date and grow their careers.
We strive for transparency and don't collect excess data.