Code Review Guidelines

In This Document

• In This Document
• Code Review Purpose
• Review Process
  • Pull Request Requirements
• Reviewer Guidelines
  • What to Look For
  • Review Etiquette
• Author Guidelines
  • Preparing for Review
  • Responding to Feedback
• Review Timeframes
• Special Review Types
  • Architecture Reviews
  • Security Reviews
• Code Review Tools
• Continuous Improvement
• Integration with Team Practices

Code Review Purpose

Code reviews are a critical part of our development process that align with both our Communication Protocols and Global Coding Standards. They serve to:

1. Improve Code Quality: Identify bugs, security issues, and performance problems
2. Ensure Consistency: Maintain coding standards across the codebase
3. Share Knowledge: Spread understanding of different parts of the system
4. Mentor Team Members: Help developers grow through constructive feedback

Review Process

Our code review process follows these steps:

Pull Request Requirements

• Title: Clear, concise description of the change
• Description: Purpose, approach, and testing details
• Reviewers: Minimum 2 reviewers (including CTO)
• Labels: Appropriate categorization (bug, feature, etc.)
• Linked Issues: Reference to related tickets
• Tests: Evidence of testing (unit, integration, manual)

Reviewer Guidelines

What to Look For

Functionality

• Does the code work as intended?
• Are edge cases handled appropriately?
• Is error handling comprehensive?
• Are there any logic errors?
• Does the implementation match the requirements?

Code Quality

• Does the code follow our Coding Standards?
• Is the code DRY (Don't Repeat Yourself)?
• Is the code maintainable and readable?
• Are functions and classes appropriately sized?
• Are variable and function names clear and descriptive?

Security

• Is user input properly validated and sanitized?
• Are authentication and authorization checks in place?
• Are there any potential SQL injection vulnerabilities?
• Is sensitive data properly protected?
• Are there any potential security risks?

Performance

• Are there any performance bottlenecks?
• Are database queries optimized?
• Is memory usage efficient?
• Are there any N+1 query issues?
• Could the algorithm be more efficient?

Testing

• Are there appropriate unit tests?
• Do tests cover edge cases?
• Is the test coverage sufficient?
• Are tests clear and maintainable?
• Do tests actually verify the correct behavior?

Review Etiquette

• Be respectful and constructive
• Focus on the code, not the person
• Explain the "why" behind suggestions
• Provide examples when possible
• Acknowledge good practices and improvements
• Prioritize feedback (critical vs. nice-to-have)

Author Guidelines

Preparing for Review

• Self-review your code before submitting
• Keep PRs reasonably sized (ideally < 400 lines of code)
• Provide context and explanation in the PR description
• Highlight areas that need special attention
• Run tests and linting before submitting

Responding to Feedback

• Respond to all comments
• Be open to suggestions
• Ask for clarification when needed
• Explain your reasoning when disagreeing
• Make requested changes promptly

Review Timeframes

• Standard PRs: Review within 24 hours
• Urgent PRs: Review within 4 hours (must be marked as urgent)
• Large PRs: Review within 48 hours (for PRs > 500 lines)

Special Review Types

Architecture Reviews

For significant architectural changes:

• Schedule a dedicated architecture review meeting
• Include senior developers and architects
• Document design decisions and trade-offs
• Consider long-term maintenance implications

Security Reviews

For security-sensitive code:

• Assign a security-focused reviewer
• Use a security checklist
• Consider threat modeling
• Verify proper handling of sensitive data

Code Review Tools

• GitHub Pull Requests
• Automated code quality tools (PHPStan, ESLint)
• CI/CD pipeline checks
• Code coverage reports

Continuous Improvement

We regularly evaluate and improve our code review process:

• Collect feedback on the review process
• Track common issues found in reviews
• Update guidelines based on lessons learned
• Share best practices from successful reviews

Integration with Team Practices

Our code review process integrates with:

• Pair Programming: Paired code often requires less intensive review
• Knowledge Management: Document insights from code reviews
• Testing Requirements: Verify test coverage during review
• Documentation: Ensure code is properly documented