CH03. L02. Review Process

Summary

This script delves into the nuances of software testing, contrasting dynamic and static testing approaches. It emphasizes the review process within static testing, detailing its types, steps, and roles involved. The script outlines the progression from informal to formal reviews, highlighting the structured six-step formal review process, including planning, kickoff, individual preparation, review meetings, rework, and follow-up. It also discusses the importance of clear objectives, team selection, and organization for a successful review, ultimately aiming to improve software quality.

Takeaways

• 📚 The script discusses the distinction between dynamic and static testing in software development.
• 🔍 It delves into the two main components of static testing: reviews and static analysis tools that examine code without execution.
• 👥 The review process involves different roles, including the manager, moderator, author, reviewers, and scribe, each with specific responsibilities.
• 📝 Reviews can be informal or formal, with the latter having a structured process with steps, rules, and documentation.
• 🚀 The formal review process consists of six steps: Planning, Kickoff Meeting, Individual Preparation, Review Meeting, Rework, and Follow-up.
• 🔑 The success of the review process hinges on clear objectives, the right team selection, and effective communication of identified issues.
• 🔬 Static analysis tools are used in the coding stage to detect defects and issues against coding standards before code execution.
• 📈 The importance of the review process lies in its ability to improve software quality and ensure adherence to project requirements and standards.
• 📋 The script outlines the different types of reviews, ranging from informal to highly formal processes like Inspections and Walkthroughs.
• 👥 The roles within the review process are crucial for its success, with the manager initiating the process, the moderator facilitating discussions, and the author addressing identified defects.
• 📝 Documentation is key in formal reviews, ensuring that all findings and resolutions are recorded for future reference and process improvement.

Q & A

What is the main difference between dynamic testing and static testing?

Dynamic testing involves running the software and observing its behavior, whereas static testing is the process of examining the software without executing it, typically through reviews and static analysis tools.

What are the two main sections of static testing mentioned in the script?

The two main sections of static testing are reviews and static analysis. Reviews involve examining documents from each stage of software development, while static analysis uses tools to examine the code without execution.

What is the purpose of using static analysis tools during the coding stage?

Static analysis tools are used to review the code without running it, identifying defects and problems against coding standards that may cause issues during the software development process.

Can you explain the role of a reviewer in the review process of static testing?

The reviewer is responsible for examining documents from the software development stages, identifying potential defects, and providing feedback to improve the quality of the software before the implementation phase.

What are the types of reviews mentioned in the script, and how do they differ in formality?

The types of reviews mentioned are informal reviews, walkthroughs, technical reviews, and inspections. They differ in formality from informal, which is amicable and verbal, to very formal, which follows strict procedures and documentation.

What are the six steps or activities involved in a formal review process?

The six steps are: 1) Planning, 2) Kickoff meeting, 3) Individual preparation, 4) Review meeting, 5) Rework, and 6) Follow up. These steps ensure a structured and documented review process.

What is the role of the manager in the review process?

The manager's role includes deciding the start time of the review process, setting the required time for the review in the project schedule, and checking whether the process objectives were achieved after the review.

What is the difference between the roles of the moderator and the author in a review meeting?

The moderator is responsible for organizing and conducting the review meeting, leading the review process, and mediating between different viewpoints. The author, on the other hand, is responsible for writing the documents to be reviewed and addressing any defects found during the review.

What is the purpose of the walkthrough review type?

The purpose of a walkthrough is to provide learning, understanding, and to find defects in the documents. It involves the author leading the review meeting and can be either informal or formal.

What are the factors that contribute to the success of the review process?

Success factors include having clear and predefined objectives, choosing the best team for the review, presenting and discussing bugs in a positive and objective manner, fostering trust, and organizing and managing time effectively.

How does the inspection review differ from the technical review in terms of formality and process?

The inspection review is more formal and expansive than the technical review. It requires a trained moderator, more structured roles and preparations, and the collection of a review process matrix. It focuses on finding defects and ensuring the review is conducted properly and acceptably.

Outlines

00:00

🔍 Introduction to Static Testing and Review Process

This paragraph introduces the concept of static testing, distinguishing it from dynamic testing, and then delves into the specifics of static testing. It is divided into two main sections: reviews and static analysis. Reviews involve examining documents at each stage of software development, from requirements to coding, by designated reviewers. Static analysis is performed using tools that analyze code without execution to identify defects against coding standards. The paragraph emphasizes the importance of the review process, its types, application, activities, roles, responsibilities, and its significance in the software development lifecycle. It also outlines the difference between formal and informal reviews, the steps involved in a formal review, and the factors that determine the choice of review process.

05:02

📝 Roles and Responsibilities in the Formal Review Process

The second paragraph focuses on the roles and responsibilities within the formal review process. It details the manager's tasks, such as deciding the start time, allocating time in the project schedule, and checking if review objectives are met. The moderator's role includes organizing and conducting review meetings, leading the document review, and mediating team viewpoints. The author is responsible for document correction based on review feedback. Reviewers, or 'checkers'/'inspectors', are selected for their technical expertise and are tasked with identifying document defects. The scribe or recorder documents all review activities, including bugs and meeting minutes. The paragraph also discusses the types of reviews, ranging from informal to formal, and their characteristics, such as the informal review's amicable and verbal nature, and the more structured formal reviews like Walkthrough, Technical Review, and Inspection.

10:02

🛠️ Review Types and Success Factors for Effective Static Testing

The final paragraph explores the different types of reviews in more depth, including the informal review, Walkthrough, Technical Review, and Inspection. Each type has unique characteristics and purposes, such as the Walkthrough's focus on team learning and understanding, the Technical Review's emphasis on discussing and solving technical problems, and the Inspection's goal of finding defects. The paragraph concludes with key factors for a successful review process, such as clear objectives, the right team selection, positive and objective discussion of bugs, trust, choosing the appropriate review type, and effective organization and time management. It stresses that the review process is not about individual evaluation but about improving software quality.

Keywords

💡Dynamic Testing

Dynamic Testing refers to the process of executing software applications to verify their behavior and ensure they function correctly. It is a key concept in the video, contrasting with static testing, and is used to illustrate the different approaches to software testing. In the script, dynamic testing is mentioned as a separate category from static testing, highlighting the comprehensive nature of software quality assurance.

💡Static Testing

Static Testing is the process of examining software without executing it, typically involving code reviews and analysis to find defects against coding standards. It is central to the video's theme, as it is divided into two sections: reviews and static analysis. The script discusses static testing in depth, explaining its importance in the software development lifecycle before the code execution stage.

💡Reviews

Reviews in the context of the video refer to the examination of documents and code during the software development process to ensure quality and adherence to standards. They are a subset of static testing and are crucial for identifying issues early in the development cycle. The script mentions reviews as a key part of the static testing process, detailing their types, application, and importance.

💡Static Analysis Tools

Static Analysis Tools are software applications used to automatically review code without running it, helping to identify defects and issues that may violate coding standards. These tools are highlighted in the script as part of the static testing process, particularly during the coding stage, to emphasize their role in finding problems that might not be caught by human reviewers alone.

💡Formal Review

A Formal Review is a structured and systematic process with defined steps, rules, and documentation requirements for examining software documents or code. The script describes formal reviews as opposed to informal ones, emphasizing the need for planning, kickoff meetings, individual preparation, review meetings, rework, and follow-up to ensure thoroughness and accountability in the review process.

💡Informal Review

An Informal Review is a less structured and more casual method of reviewing software documents or code, often done verbally without the need for extensive documentation. The script contrasts informal reviews with formal ones, noting that they can be done in a friendly manner among team members without strict procedures.

💡Walkthrough

A Walkthrough is a type of review where the author leads the meeting and the team goes through the document to gain understanding and identify defects. It is one of the formal review types mentioned in the script, characterized by its learning and understanding objectives, and its potential for varying levels of formality.

💡Technical Review

Technical Review is a formal review process involving high-level technical specialists and sometimes management to discuss, evaluate alternatives, and solve technical problems. The script describes technical reviews as a more specialized form of review, focused on technical accuracy and adherence to specifications and standards.

💡Inspection

Inspection, also known as Peer Review, is the most formal type of review, where a trained moderator leads the process, and reviewers of the same or higher expertise level participate. The script highlights inspection as a comprehensive review process aimed at defect detection, with mandatory roles, preparations, and checklists.

💡Success Factors

Success Factors in the context of the video refer to the elements that contribute to the effectiveness and success of the review process. The script outlines several factors such as clear objectives, the right team selection, positive and objective discussion of defects, trust, and organization, emphasizing their importance for a successful review process.

Highlights

Dynamic and static testing are distinguished as two fundamental approaches in software testing.

Static testing is further divided into document reviews and static analysis using tools to detect coding standards violations.

Document reviews begin from the project's inception and extend through to the coding phase, involving various roles and responsibilities.

Static analysis tools are employed during the coding phase to identify defects without executing the code.

The review process is explored in depth, including its types, application, activities, participant roles, and its overall importance.

Reviews range from informal to formal, with the latter involving systematic procedures and documentation.

Formal reviews are characterized by a structured approach with defined steps, rules, and documentation.

Six key steps in the formal review process are outlined, starting with planning and concluding with follow-up.

The kickoff meeting is crucial for distributing documents and clarifying review objectives and process details.

Individual preparation involves reviewing documents for potential defects and preparing questions and comments.

The review meeting is where team members discuss individual findings, collect comments, and address defects.

Rework involves the document author resolving identified defects and documenting any changes.

Follow-up ensures that all identified defects are resolved and the review objectives and exit criteria are met.

Roles within the formal review process include the manager, moderator, author, reviewers, and scribe, each with specific responsibilities.

The manager's role is to initiate the review, allocate time, and verify if objectives are achieved post-review.

The moderator organizes and leads review meetings, coordinates viewpoints, and follows up on tasks.

The author is responsible for document creation, modifications, and addressing review feedback.

Reviewers are selected for their technical expertise to identify document defects and suggest improvements.

The scribe records all proceedings, including bugs and discussion points, and takes meeting minutes.

Four types of reviews are detailed: informal review, walkthrough, technical review, and inspection, each with unique characteristics and purposes.

Success factors for the review process include clear objectives, the right team selection, positive and objective discussion of bugs, trust, and organization.

Transcripts

So far we've talked about the difference between

the dynamic testing & the static testing.

then we got deeper and divided

the static testing into 2 sections:

one section for the reviews.

It is responsible for reviewing all

documents resulted from each stage of

the software development stages,

that we work from the project's beginning.

Starting from the requirements till

we reach the coding stage, which is the

responsibility of the reviewers with all their roles.

The second section is for

the static analysis.

This is when we reach the coding stage.

Here we will use some programs

called "Static Analysis Tools".

Their function is to review this code

without running it. we will execute it

and find most of the defects

and problems against

the coding standard, which is likely

to appear when we reach

the code execution stage during

the software development.

Let's go more deeper and know more

about the reviews process.

we will know its types, how to apply it,

what are the activities included in it,

the role of every one participating in it

and his responsibility through this process.

and finally, what is

the importance of the review process itself?

how can it help us?

what factors that make it work

as a basic process, before starting

the implementation of our software?

Before we talk about

the review process in details, we should

know first that types of reviews

move gradually from the informal process

or what we call not formal,

so I can do it with my team friendly,

to the systematic / formal process.

this process is the formal way that

has steps, rules, implementation procedures

and documentation.

First of all, what is the difference

between the formal and informal reviews?

The informal is done verbally.

This means that we don't need to

document it, as if the team

is discussing an issue and they

are exchanging views about the document in a friendly way.

For the formal review,

it has a special way for implementation

according to its type. This is the way

that the time is obliged to apply.

and by the end of this process

we must document these reviews to help

us in our work as testing and development.

So who will determine and choose the way

of implementing reviews to be followed?

what determines the way is some factors

including: the size of development process.

do we have legal or regulatory requirements?

do we need an audition,

which we call Audit trial?

To make any formal reviews,

we always have 6 steps or

activities that should be done respectively.

Step 1:Planning,

through which we can define

the entry criteria.

Here we should ask whether the documents are

ready to start the review process or no?

we also define the review criteria

and what are the roles

and the persons that should be there

and what their responsibilities are,

and what are the sections to be reviewed?

we should also define the exit criteria,

in which we set when we will

stop the review process.

Step 2: The kickoff meeting

in which we distribute

the documents to be reviewed

on all people who will participate in

the process. we should clarify the objectives

that are required to be fulfilled, and

explain the process in details.

Step 3 :Individual Preparation.

It means that each person, who

will participate in the review process

and took some of the documents to

review them in the previous step,

will read, understand and

prepare his part individually,

and check if there are potential defects.

He should prepare all his questions

and comments to be ready

for the discussion in

the review meeting, which will happen

in the next step.

Step 2: The Review meeting

In this stage, we start having

a meeting to the whole team who participate

in the review process, and took part of

the documents to prepare it in the previous step,

to discuss the results of each one

of the team separately.

Also, we collect all the comments

and notes they've recorded.

Then we talk about the defects we've found,

and what are the suggestions

with the way to resolve them.

Here, we've reached Step 5

which is Rework. here we

get all the documents, after reviewing

and finding defects, to the author,

who is the owner,

who wrote the documents,

to start resolve the defects found

and to clarify the unclear parts,

and to document any changes happened

to the original documents.

then he keep the last correct and

updates based on the reviewers' comments

Step 6: Follow up

which is very important

through this step we make sure that

whether the defects we found in

the documents reviewed were resolved

or not. Then we start collecting some

matrix about the defects,

its number, what were resolved, what

were not ...and so on.

we will also check whether we've achieved the objective

of the review process and did we reached

the exit criteria or not.

Now, we know the 6 main steps

that are required to conduct

the formal review process

which can be divided into

sub-steps as shown in this figure.

Remember the informal review which

is done in a verbal and amicable way

among the team members, without the need of

preparation or even documenting

what was discussed.

You may notice that

the formal review is a process with

many activities and steps

and need a large team to share in it.

Each one of them has a particular

role with responsibilities and tasks

that he has to do.

let's know more about these roles

and responsibilities in details.

The first role is the manger.

who has 3 main tasks,

the 1st one is to decide the start time

of the review process. 2nd one

is to set the required time for

the review process to assign

the enough time for it in the project

schedule.3rd task is

to check, after finishing the review process,

whether the process objectives were

achieved or not.

Let's move to the second role which is

the Moderator, he is responsible for

organizing and conducting the review

meeting. He also leads the process of reviewing

the document or a group of documents

in addition, he follows up

executing tasks after the review meeting.

Finally, one of his important tasks is

to mediate between points of view and

to coordinate the different views of the team members.

This assigns him to a great responsibility

for the success of the review process.

The Third role is the Author,

who wrote the documents

to be reviewed and he is the original

owner, who we always get back to

modify and fix any defects

appear during the review.

The fourth role is the reviewers, they are

the team who will do the review process

for the selected documents.

They are chosen according to

requirements of the review process.

as some of them should have a technical

experience and background about a particular field

or a particular business domain.

So through their experience , they will be useful for

reviewing the specialized parts

in the document.

we can also call them "checkers" or "inspectors".

After a good preparation, they

become able to identify

what the bugs of a document are

and to discuss the suggestions to fix them

we should take into consideration

that they must participate

in any meetings related to the review stage.

The last role is the person who is responsible

for recording and documenting all

what happen during the review process

including recording all the bugs,

obstacles and the points

discussed during the meeting.

he also takes the minutes of meeting.

this is what we call :

"Scribe"or "Recorder".

Now, we have talked about the 5

main roles of the team that will participate

in the formal review process.

We also described the responsibilities

of every one of them. Here we will

talk again about the types of reviews,

which grade from the very informal

to very formal.

Let's learn more about these types

in details, and know the characteristics

and specifications of each type.

This figure shows 4 types of reviews:

the first type is the informal review.

Starting from the second type

till the fourth one,they belong to

the formal reviews group, but

in different formality degrees.

All the 4 types are:

Informal review,

Walkthrough, Technical Review

and Inspection.

We should take care that every type of

the 4 types has a group of

the characteristics and main purposes

which we will know and

differentiate between them so as not to get confused.

The first type is the informal,its characteristics

as we mentioned before,

is that its done in a amicable and verbal form.

which means that it has no definite steps

to be followed, and it is not necessary

to document the results we got from it.

Regarding the extent of its use,

this depends on the person

who we ask his help

and whether he is a specialist or not.

The main objective of this type

"The main purpose" of this review:

It is an inexpensive way to get some benefit.

It is a way that won't cost a lot of money

to have the view of a specialist.

The second type is the Walkthrough.

its characteristics are that

the author is the one who leads

the review meeting. It has

scenarios, dry runs,

and peer groups. There are also

open--ended sessions. we can optionally

organize a pre-meeting preparation of reviewers.

we can also have a review report,

and prepare a list of findings,

optionally, and it can have

scribe who is not the author.

we should note that

implementing this way may be

informal or we get it till it

becomes very formal.

Note that the scribe is not always

in this type of review

and any member of the team

can do his role.

For the purpose of this type,

it is very clear from its name,

walkthrough. it means that the team

read the documents more than once,

raise questions and know each single

info from the author.

so its purposes are:

learning, gaining,

understanding, and finding defects.

The third type is "Technical Review".

As in the previous types, there is also

a review for documents. However,

this time it's not between the team

and the author, this time, there are

specialists of high technical

background. Sometimes

there is management participation.

For the person responsible

for managing meetings

for this type of reviews, he must be

a trained moderator. This is not

the author. The purpose of this type

of reviews is that we discuss,

make decisions,

evaluate all the alternatives,

try to find defects,

and we solve all the technical problems.

Finally,we check conformance to

specifications and standards.

the last type we will talk about

is the very formal.

we also call it the Inspection review

or Peer review.

In general, this type has the same

characteristics of the technical review

but more expansively.

This means that the one who leads this type

is also a trained moderator.

the review can be done whether

by persons of the same level of efficiency

from the team, or some times

we need more specialized persons

Moreover, the distribution of roles, preparations

before meetings, and preparing the checklist

with the tasks required to be done

is not optional in this type.

In addition to that, we collect here the matrix

about the current review process

Notice that the presence of the Reader

and process improvement is optional

in this type of reviews because the moderator

is the one who present the report.

Also determining when to start

or to end the review in a proper

and acceptable way for the program

required to be produced is the responsibility

of the moderator with the rest of team.

for the main purpose of this type of review

it is finding defects.

Now we've finished the 4 types

of reviews, and there is only one last point

which is very important

"what are the factors that we should keep eye on to grant the success of the review process?"

what does that mean?

This means, what are the success factors of the review?

first of all, you should have

clear and predefined objectives

for the review process.

i.e. why do you conduct the review?

second, the best choice of the team

which is chosen according to

the objectives of review.

as long as the team of the review process

are on a high level of understanding

the documents,their ability

to test and prepare for the review process

will be faster.

Another very important point which is

the bugs that appear during the review.

They have to be presented and discussed

with the whole team in a positive and objective form.

Not only identifying objectives,

and the positive spirit are important

but also trust is important.

At the end, this review is not for

evaluating individuals, however,

it is for evaluating and improving

the software quality.

Notice that choosing the best type of

reviews and assigning the responsibilities

of the participants,

besides the checklist

all that are done according to

what suites the software objectives

and the technical backgrounds

of the reviewers.

sometimes, there are pre-prepartion

and pre-training to know

how to work in the review stage.

Finally,

at any stage of work in our life,

as much as you are organized

and have time management,

the objective you target will be easier

to be reached. Here, the same rule applies

as much as the organization is correct

and following the plan, so the review

will be successful, and there

will be enough time to all the activities

done during the process.

Now, we've finished the second point

of the static testing, which is Review.

we've understood its types, the activities inside it

and the way of executing them,

the roles of the participants,

in addition to what are the factors

that help the review process to succeed.