Documentation for Crucible 3.0.x. Documentation for other versions is available too.

Skip to end of metadata
Go to start of metadata

This document describes several forms of Crucible Workflow in detail. Depending on the size of your team, there are four different ways that a development team could use Crucible for code reviews. Choose the workflow which suits your team.

 

Lightweight Code Commenting with Crucible (individual)

  1. Author commits new work.
  2. Author creates the review, and adds comments using the easy web interface.
  3. Author summarizes and closes the review, saving the code comments in Crucible's database, which is stored outside the repository.

    Diagram: Workflow for Lightweight Code Commenting

    Lightweight code commenting

One-to-One Reviews (Agile Pair)

  1. Author creates the review.
  2. Author invites reviewer to take part in the review.
  3. Reviewer creates comments on the code.
  4. Author responds to reviewer comments.
  5. Follow-up comments are made if necessary.
  6. Reviewer finishes own review process.
  7. Author summarizes and closes the review.

    Diagram: Workflow for One-to-One Reviews

    one-to-one-review

For more information on one-to-one reviews, see The Crucible workflow. The workflow process in Crucible is covered in detail within this document.

One-to-Many Reviews Without a Moderator (Agile Team)

  1. Author creates the review.
  2. Author invites reviewers to take part in the review.
  3. Reviewers make comments on the code.
  4. Author responds to reviewer comments, follow-up comments are made if necessary.
  5. Reviewers complete their reviews.
  6. Author summarizes and closes the review.

    Diagram: Workflow for One-to-Many Reviews

    one-to-one-review


 

Formal Group Reviews (CMM Team)

  1. Author creates the review.
  2. Moderator invites reviewers to take part in the review.
  3. Reviewers make comments on the code.
  4. Author responds to reviewer comments.
  5. Follow-up comments are made if necessary.
  6. Each discussion point is settled by the Moderator.
  7. Moderator summarizes and closes the review.

    Diagram: Workflow for Formal Group Reviews

    Moderated review
    To see a simple example of how to use Crucible with two people, see The Crucible workflow.
  • No labels

2 Comments

  1. How does the moderator settle the discussion point as mentioned in formal group review flow above?

  2. "Author invites reviewer"

    The "invites" word seems a bit weak.  From what I can tell, the author is effectively assigning the review to reviewers.

    From a Lean-Agile perspective, the workflow should not assign (i.e., "push") reviews onto others.  Rather, folks should join (i.e., "pull") reviews based on the review backlog.