Data collection during reviews is crucial. You have already seen that at various stages in the process, data are recorded. Because reviews are largely human processes, if data are not properly recorded, the information can easily be lost. In addition to logging the defects identified by the review process, effort data must also be captured. Detailed defect data are needed for tracking defects in the project. The overall defect and effort data are needed for analyzing the effectiveness of the review and for constructing the review capability baseline. Hence, the summary data for each review are maintained in a review database. This section describes the key forms used for data collection during reviews at Infosys.
Reviewers use the self-preparation log to record all defects or issues found during their independent reviews. The effort spent during the reviews is also recorded. Each reviewer prepares this log. In addition to identifying the project, the work product, the reviewer, and other facts, entries in the log specify the location of the issue or defect and the reviewer's assessment regarding its seriousness or criticality. The form shown in Figure 10.2 can be used as is or implemented via a spreadsheet.
The scribe prepares a log of the group review meeting that lists the defects and issues that were identified during the meeting. Hence, it includes all defects found by individual reviewers in their self-reviews that were validated as defects or issues during the meeting, as well as the additional defects found during the meeting. Unlike the self-preparation log, which lists defects as perceived by a reviewer, the group review meeting log lists only those defects that have been agreed to by the author. In other words, it lists actual defects found, and it is the official defects list of the review.
In addition to each defect's location and description, its severity is recorded in this log. The severity reflects the consensus of the group review team. As discussed in Chapter 7, the severity of a defect can be either critical, major, minor, or cosmetic. If it can be determined at which stage the defect was injected, this information can also be recorded, as can the type of the defect.
The issues raised are listed in a separate log. For each issue, a person is assigned to resolve it. This log also contains the total effort spent (in person-hours) in the meeting.
Figure 10.3 shows the format of the group review meeting log. It can be implemented via a spreadsheet or some other mechanism.
The defects log is used to track all defects to closure. To analyze the effectiveness of a review, however, only summary-level information is needed. This information is also needed for updating the review baseline. For process improvement and understanding of the review process, the group review summary report is the most important element. Hence, this information is maintained in a separate review database that is available for analysis.
The summary report describes the work product; the total effort spent and the amounts spent in each of the review process activities; the total number of defects found for each category; and the size of the work product being reviewed. If the types of defects were recorded, the number of defects in each category can be recorded in the summary. In addition to the data on effort and defects, the summary contains suggestions for the next phase. Finally, the summary indicates whether a re-review is needed. A completed summary report is shown later in this chapter.