Peer review another team's project and provide suggestions for improvements. This helps the other team by providing a fresh perspective and giving them outside feedback. Once complete, we'll be providing the reports to the teams so they can address your collective suggestions. The peer-review also helps you: you will see how another team is approaching a problem, which can give you ideas of what to do or what to avoid.
This assignment is to be completed individually. (It is not a group assignment.)
Due: 11/21/23 11:59pm PT. Submit to Canvas and in GitHub as directed (check Calendar for any updates).
To find the project to review, open this Assignment in Canvas and find the project name associated with your name in the table.
Read the developer guidelines, user documentation, then build, test and run the project as if you were a new developer added to the project team.
If you encounter unexpected behavior when building/testing/running the reviewed system that prevents you from proceeding, open an issue -- following the instructions described in the system's repository.
You may also provide a pull request with suggested improvements if you see how to resolve an issue that you raised. This is very helpful to the other team but optional.
Produce a single PDF document with your review consisting of two parts.
Start with the two checklists below; for any item that you cannot confirm or pose a problem, include a link to the relevant issue you opened in their repository.
There are developer guidelines, which I could easily find in the repository.
The developer guidelines are self-contained and well structured.
The description of the repository structure is clear and makes sense to me.
The instructions for how to add a new test case are clear and make sense to me.
I could build the software, following the provided instructions, on a machine matching the prerequisites mentioned in the instructions.
I could test the software, following the provided instructions.
The continuous integration (CI) setup makes sense to me, and I could find the build history.
There is a user manual, which I could easily find in the repository.
The high-level description of the system is clear.
The user manual is self-contained, well structured, and comprehensive.
The user manual contains all instructions required to use the system.
The steps below are optional as some installation may require new resources.
I could install the software, following the provided instructions.
I could run the software, following the provided instructions.
I could use the software, executing the functionality described in the manual.
The instructions for filing a bug report are clear and sufficient.
After completing the checklist, include a section of high-level feedback and constructive criticism focusing on their implementation, descriptive writing, or technical setup.
Submit this review as a PDF document to Canvas by due date. Include your name as well as the name of the project you are reviewing in the document.
In this case, still open an issue on GitHub and, additionally, explain why the instructions are insufficient in your review.
Log into your GitHub account;
open the repository of the reviewed system on GitHub;
click "Fork", which will create a clone of the repository under your account;
clone the forked repository (under your account) to your computer;
make changes and push to your forked repository;
open a pull request on GitHub into the original repository.
For each opened issue and pull request, include a reference in your written review.