:wave: Pull Request reviewer here with over 1000 reviews.
I've reviewed code across languages, team size and maturity. A good static analysis tool is not code review. The word 'context' came up 37 times in this thread (by the time I hit submit) and it is worth digging in to how I build and maintain context with teams. First up, it is my responsibility to uphold, not define a team's best current practices. If you believe a linter and static analysis tools are best current practices, you probably do not need code review. The code review process is an exercise to affirm how well a pull request meets the expectations (context) of a team and suggest remediation where appropriate.
I assume 'context' used in the threads to mean "how we do things here". As a reviewer, I conduct review understanding the problems the team wants its code reviews to optimize for or to avoid. This is due to the people creating the platform. It's a solid platform for reviewers to get things done. Every line of contributed code I review is done with an eye towards ensuring it affirms a team's stated objectives. If those objectives somehow falls outside of what I know to be true from my experiences as a professional and best current practices (BCP), I am empowered to engage the team.
I've had teams request to never provide guidance for coding style issues. Others want to know if how they modeled a React component tree could be improved. My success on the platform relies on always building context. Without that rapport it limits the depth of the review. Because code reviews are interactive, they tend to get better over time. When things go well, the relationship between team and reviewer is seeking a pareto optimum between the pull request and the team's best current practices. When needs change I adapt my reviews. It is the same treatment if you're a one person shop, SME or a listed company.
I thought of context to be more about domain/tribal knowledge rather than just "how we do things here".
You can be a ruby expert, but to review a ruby PR for Stripe's backend I think you'd need to know a lot about the various internal systems, downstream users, etc that the code impacts
Beginning last year I was in the same about you appear to be in. I can say, with a lot of confidence, I disagree with the previous comment. BECAUSE Ruby is such an articulate language it was fairly easy for me to pick up, with no formal CS classes in over 15 years. Might I suggest IF you have 1 year and 4hrs a day do the following:
1. Spend three months just in Ruby. I recommend LRTHW (Shaw) and LTP (Pine)
2. Code School 1 & 2.
3. Hartl (will hurt your head in a good way)
4. Repeat Step 1
5. Make apps, learn a few front-end frameworks (bootstrap, zurb-foundation) along the way.
I do have the time and am considering Code Academy in Chicago, but after more investigation I have began to wonder if RoR is really for beginners..because it borrows so much from others.
I had planned to take a year and learn it full-time starting in March, but I am having second thoughts.
I think one of the strengths of Ruby and thus RoR is its kind of simple. Although I will admit the leap to 3.1 was probably more difficult than it ought to have been. I can only speak for NYC but joining the local meetup community has done wonders for my skill building. But remember, this is a ten year process =) Good luck!
I've been steeped in this space for a bit - there's catchafire, 5000hands and a bunch of others.
I guess it all depends on geographic scope and focus of the startup. Unreasonable Institute and Global Social Business Incubator are good places to begin looking.
@prognostikos - thanks man. I saw your template and came across a few others. I came across this gem (https://github.com/kfaustino/rails-templater) I might give it a go. I understand about 85% of your script so I am definitely going to try and create my own from all this inspiration.
Thanks, I found a local bike shop and they fitted me, so at least I know how to buy a bike for my needs. I will check this place out though. I also found out some bike manufacturers do not allow stores to sell online. Interesting business challenge for retailers. Now I can see why a lot of the bike shop sites are so sparse on functional...and form.
I've reviewed code across languages, team size and maturity. A good static analysis tool is not code review. The word 'context' came up 37 times in this thread (by the time I hit submit) and it is worth digging in to how I build and maintain context with teams. First up, it is my responsibility to uphold, not define a team's best current practices. If you believe a linter and static analysis tools are best current practices, you probably do not need code review. The code review process is an exercise to affirm how well a pull request meets the expectations (context) of a team and suggest remediation where appropriate.
I assume 'context' used in the threads to mean "how we do things here". As a reviewer, I conduct review understanding the problems the team wants its code reviews to optimize for or to avoid. This is due to the people creating the platform. It's a solid platform for reviewers to get things done. Every line of contributed code I review is done with an eye towards ensuring it affirms a team's stated objectives. If those objectives somehow falls outside of what I know to be true from my experiences as a professional and best current practices (BCP), I am empowered to engage the team.
I've had teams request to never provide guidance for coding style issues. Others want to know if how they modeled a React component tree could be improved. My success on the platform relies on always building context. Without that rapport it limits the depth of the review. Because code reviews are interactive, they tend to get better over time. When things go well, the relationship between team and reviewer is seeking a pareto optimum between the pull request and the team's best current practices. When needs change I adapt my reviews. It is the same treatment if you're a one person shop, SME or a listed company.
k thx bye