[teampractices] Code review social norms

[Dan Garry]

On 16 March 2016 at 10:33, Kevin Smith <ksmith at wikimedia.org> wrote:
>
> I wonder if my heavy Test-Driven Development and heavy Refactoring
> preferences are what is putting me on the opposite side of this debate. I
> have no problem with a commit followed immediately by a rename commit
> followed immediately by a commit that rearranges the code sequence for
> clarity, followed immediately by a refactor extract method commit. Whether
> those are all done by one person, or by 4, doesn't matter to me (as long as
> everyone is communicating clearly to avoid stepping on each other).
>

Speaking as a volunteer dev on the Android app, I personally prefer your
approach; I've often introduced convenience methods, then when asked to
move said method to a different class, written a second patch that does
that which is dependent on the first. It makes things easier to test, and
makes it much clearer what's happening by reducing the complexity of each
patch. I'm not dogmatic about it, however.

Dan

-- 
Dan Garry
Lead Product Manager, Discovery
Wikimedia Foundation
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/teampractices/attachments/20160316/8f1ef602/attachment.html>