DocsContributingCode Reviews

Code Reviews

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

Pull Request Guidelines

1. 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

## 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

# 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

// 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

// 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

// 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

// 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

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

After Review

1. 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

# 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