Code reviews

Our code review process ensures code quality, knowledge sharing, and maintainability.

Pull request guidelines

1. Title format

PR Title Format

# Format
<type>(<scope>): <description>
 
# Examples
feat(payments): implement Wave payment provider
fix(webhooks): handle timeout errors
docs(api): update authentication guide

2. Description template

PR Description Template

## Changes
- Added Wave payment provider integration
- Implemented webhook signature verification
- Updated API documentation
 
## Testing
- Unit tests added for payment processing
- Integration tests for webhook handling
- Manual testing with test credentials
 
## Screenshots
[If applicable]
 
## Related issues
Closes #123

Review process

1. Self review

Terminal - Self Review Checks

# Run tests
npm test
 
# Check linting
npm run lint
 
# Build documentation
npm run docs:build

2. Code review

Request reviews from relevant team members
Address feedback promptly
Re-request review after changes

3. CI checks

All tests must pass
Code coverage requirements met
No security vulnerabilities
Documentation updated

Review checklist

1. Code quality

Follows coding standards
No duplicate code
Proper error handling
Efficient implementation

2. Testing

Unit tests added/updated
Integration tests if needed
Edge cases covered
Test coverage maintained

3. Security

Input validation
Authentication/Authorization
Sensitive data handling
Security best practices

4. Documentation

Code comments
API documentation
README updates
Changelog entry

Best practices

1. As a submitter

Submitter Example (Good vs Bad)

// DO: Small, focused changes
function validatePayment(amount: number): boolean {
  return amount > 0 && amount <= 1000000;
}
 
// DON'T: Multiple unrelated changes
/*
function validateAndProcessPayment() {
  // Mixed concerns
}
*/

2. As a reviewer

Reviewer Example (Good vs Bad Feedback)

// Good feedback
// Consider using a type guard for better type safety
function isValidAmount(amount: unknown): amount is number {
  return typeof amount === 'number' && amount > 0;
}
 
// Unhelpful feedback
// // This is wrong

3. Code examples

Code Example (Before/After)

// Before
/*
function process(data) {
  if (data) {
    return data.value;
  }
}
*/
 
// After
function process(data: InputData): OutputData {
  if (!data) {
    throw new Error('Data is required');
  }
  return data.value;
}

Review comments

1. Constructive feedback

Constructive Feedback Example

// Instead of:
// // This is messy
 
// Better:
// Consider extracting this logic into a separate function
// for better reusability and testing:
function validateWebhookSignature(
  payload: string,
  signature: string
): boolean {
  // Implementation
}

2. Suggestions

Suggestion Example

// Instead of:
// // Use better names
 
// Better:
// Consider more descriptive names:
// - `processPayment` -> `validateAndProcessPayment`
// - `data` -> `paymentData`

After review

1. Addressing feedback

Terminal - Addressing Feedback

# Update branch
git fetch origin
git rebase origin/develop
 
# Make changes
git add .
git commit -m "fix: address review feedback"
 
# Force push if needed
git push --force-with-lease

2. Merging

Terminal - Merging Strategies

# Squash and merge
git checkout develop
git merge --squash feature/payment-method
 
# Or rebase and merge
git checkout develop
git rebase feature/payment-method

Next steps

Code of Conduct Branching