3 ms·
This is for a code review which would be well after architecture and be the entirely wrong place to systematically question architecture.
by CalChris 7y ago
This is for a code review which would be well after architecture and be the entirely wrong place to systematically question architecture.
- codeGreene 7y agoTo be honest, after reading this document, I believe it contain MUCH more information than just how to conduct a code review.
- LanceH 7y agoMy #1,2, and 3 rules are to get the code in the right place. You could vaguely say that is architecture related--is it in the main app, a library, etc... Those decisions can be tough for junior developers and can often be disputed by seniors (we don't need a library yet.) "Architecture" is very vague and used a lot of different ways.
- MichaelMoser123 7y ago# This is for a code review which would be well after architecture and be the entirely wrong place to systematically question architecture. I think that is part of the scrum philosophy: management can question whatever it wants and whenever it wants to; if the timeframe explodes that that is the blame of the developer.