Working with remote team members on code reviews. How can you ensure a smooth and effective process?

Encourage everyone to review code in the team. This way its never the responsibility of the only team lead or seniors. Builds rapport between individuals and well as everyone is aware of the changes ready to be merged. Also review message should be more like "We can consider x instead of y" rather than "You should do x like y". This give a more team outlook, rather than calling out. End of the day we are dealing with humans with emotions. Be kind.

I think, if those guidelines contains clear point of view, like context, deadline, main aim to follow it, it will be more clear. It should answer the questions, what, where, why and how. If we can get these questions' answers, these clear guidelines will help a lot.

Every organisation should have crystal clear guidelines on nomenclature, comments, best practices and components. On onboarding share this to all the developers and on every merge / push to prod it should be verified. Proper authority should get sufficient time to review code unless the entire process is of no use. The commit should be short and with limited changes.

Doing code review with either side (or both) being remote is absolutely the same process as not-remote. To review anyone's code, there is no need to sit next to them. In fact, it is better not to sit next to them, but to do it in a separate comfortable space, making sure that code meets established standards. As with any remote work, we use phone and electronic tools (email, chat, other) to ask and answer questions. In fact, it is better to use official electronic communications (email, chat, other) rather than I-said-you-said, for everyone involved to be able to review these communications later.

Setting upfront guidelines for the team upfront is indeed very important and crucial, as it sets the standard and quality expectations. It helps the reviewers come up with a smoother code review experience, especially in a remote collaboration of workplaces.

We need to understand that the review given is strictly for the code written and that doesn’t attribute to the development capabilities of a person. A culture needs to be set up where review comments are not being taken personally rather seen as a way to improve the code base. And the latter takes precedence over anything else.

We all work across team and efficient code management tool are must. GitHub and BitBucket are on top. Easy and efficient. All basic needs are covered under their free subscription, as we grow towards advanced needs, switch to premium subscription.

GitHub / bitbucket are more than efficient tools to review code. Having a few plugins like @synk to check deprecated libraries is also good.

If you are using GIT, then GIT code comments and proper checklists will help to track changes. Sometimes basic excel trackers also helps.

Constructive feedback is key for our remote code reviews. I find it works best when it's specific. For example, instead of saying 'This code needs work,' I can say, 'This function could benefit from adding comments to explain its logic, similar to how Sarah did in her recent pull request.' This helps everyone learn and improve, even if we're not physically together.

"Focus on the code, not the coder" is good if it means that the developer should not feel guilty. On the other hand, focusing on technical matters only (especially when working remotely) can be harsh. So it can be a good idea to think of a person and try commend whenever possible. "Writing it like this is a great idea. Could you find a way to make it more readable for others?"

Try to avoid playing the "blame game" in review comments. What I mean by that is try leave comments that are agnostic to the author and don't leave them feeling attacked. Instead of saying "You shouldn't use strings like that" say something like "Strings are more efficient if used in this way..." Provide examples of the right way to do things rather than just a cryptic note that something needs to be fixed. If you find yourself leaving multiple pieces of feedback for the same issue over and over, contact the developer directly and have them walk you through it. Sometimes there's context that is missed during a code review that can make flagged issues in a review become a reasonable solution.

Focusing on the code rather than the coder is crucial. Frame your comments to encourage dialogue and learning. Using questions instead of direct statements makes feedback less confrontational. For instance, instead of saying, "This function is too complex," you could ask, "Could this function be simplified for better readability?" This approach fosters a collaborative environment where team members feel valued and motivated to improve, despite the lack of face-to-face interactions.

Constructive feedback also includes to encourage coders to continue what they are doing great. This is often left aside or implicit. I have found it helps to build up the team spirit. So having comments as "This is a much simplified approach for product B, than the one we use in product A. We should implement this for product A too.", should also be fostered.

Regular sync-ups are a game-changer for remote code reviews.My Team Scrum meet generally follows below points : 🔶 Quick Qs: Sync-ups clarify doubts on code faster than emails. (e.g., clarified complex logic during a recent pull request review) 🔶 Stay in sync: Regular chats keep everyone on the same page about code's goals. (e.g., recent sync-up helped identify an edge case I missed in my review) 🔶 Focus & clarity: Set an agenda for calls. 🔶 Visuals: Use screen sharing to explain code. 🔶 Action plan: Summarize next steps and ownership.

regular sync-ups can significantly enhance collaboration, transparency, and efficiency among remote team members during code reviews and other collaborative tasks.

Regular sync-ups, such as short daily stand-up meetings or weekly check-ins via video conferencing tools, are vital. The aim is to discuss any blockers, share insights, and prioritize tasks. These sync-ups ensure that everyone is on the same page and can address concerns promptly. This regular communication keeps the team aligned, motivated, and efficient during code reviews, even when working remotely.

If the team is distributed across different time zones, at least 1-2hours of overlapping of time helps to clarify any open points, pass any team messages and discussions.

Time zone awareness goes beyond mere scheduling; it’s about fostering a truly inclusive and efficient remote work environment. Consider creating a rotating schedule for meetings to distribute the inconvenience of odd hours fairly among team members. Leverage asynchronous communication tools like video messages or collaborative documents where team members can leave detailed comments and updates, allowing for deeper, more thoughtful feedback without time pressure. Additionally, develop a shared understanding of each team member's typical working hours and preferred communication windows, creating a culture of respect for personal time while ensuring that critical updates and reviews are addressed promptly.

I always like to pass on cool coding tricks or ways to be more efficient whenever I spot an old technique being used, but I make it clear that it's not a review blocking issue. I will leave a comment saying something like: "Not Blocking - using string interpolation is a much more efficient way of assembling a formatted response string than adding multiple strings together." Ex: Try using: $"{someSuperGreatVariable} is showing a status of {someSuperGreatStatus}" instead of doing: someSuperGreatVariable + " is showing a status of " + someSuperGreatStatus

In a teams every member can contribute if they were given to work under healthy and happy environment. Periodically revisit the best practice and processes. Remove unnecessary and useless processes. Also accept ideas if it improves the coding and reviews.

Encourage team members to regularly reflect on the code review process and suggest improvements. This might involve revising guidelines, experimenting with new tools, or adopting different communication strategies. By continuously refining the process, you can adapt to the changing needs of your remote team and enhance the overall effectiveness of your code reviews. This ongoing evolution ensures that your team remains agile, productive, and aligned with best practices.

La comunicación es la clave principal y primordial para la sincronización del equipo en todo momento, como también los medios y las herramientas que se empleen.

Usually, when you review code for a colleague, it helps a lot if you know the person you are reviewing the code for. This allows you to convey your thoughts and feedback in a way that they best understand. In addition, it helps you understand where their thoughts are coming from. This comes from developing your business EQ, which helps you know how to best communicate and give feedback to your coworkers.

Beyond the standard practices, sharing real-life examples, stories, or insights can provide valuable context and inspiration. For instance, you might highlight a time when a specific tool drastically improved your team's review process or share a story about overcoming a challenging code review scenario. These anecdotes not only humanize the process but also offer practical lessons that can be applied in future situations. By considering these extra elements, you can enrich your team's approach to remote code reviews and foster a more cohesive and knowledgeable team environment.