SysFricLrng_PeerReviewChecklists

Rev 2.00

29-Nov-17

Nexteer SWC Implementation Peer Review Summary Sheet

Component Short Name:

Windows User: Intended Use: Identify which component is being reviewed. This should match the component short name from the DataDict.m fileand the middle part of the Synergy project name, e.g. Assi for the SF001A_Assi_Impl Synergy project

SysFricLrng

Revision / Baseline:

Windows User: Intended Use: Identify the implementation baseline name intended to be used for the changed component when changes are approved E.g. SF001A_Assi_Impl_1.2.0

SF007A_SysFricLrng_Impl_3.0.1

Change Owner:

Windows User: Intended Use: Identify the developer who made the change(s) being reviewed

Matthew Leser

Work CR ID:

Windows User: Intended Use: Identify the Implementation Work CR whose work is being reviewed (may be more than one)

EA4#18370

kzshz2: Intended Use: Intended to identify at a high level to the reviewers which areas of the component have been changed. Rationale: This will be good information to know when ensuring appropriate reviews have been completed. Modified File Types:

Check the file types that needed modification for the Work CR(s); macros for the check boxes will populate the appropriate checklist tabs for the review.

kzshz2: Intended Use: Identify who where the reviewers, what they reviewed, and if the reviewed changes have been approved to release the code for testing. Comments here should be at a highlevel, the specific comments should be present on the specific review form sheet. Rationale: Since this Form will be attached to the Change Request it will confirm the approval and provides feedback in case of audits. ADD DR Level Move reviewer and approval to individual checklist form Review Checklist Summary:

Reviewed:

At start of review, all items below should be marked "No". At the end of the review, all items should be marked "Yes" or "N/A" where N/A indicates the reviewers have reviewed the existing (unchanged) item and confirmed no updates were needed for the Work CR(s).

N/A

MDD

N/A

Source Code

Yes

PolySpace

N/A

Integration Manual

N/A

Davinci Files

Comments:

Implementation update was strictly to bring in new design version. Polyspace was run for updated Rte_Stubs.h file

General Guidelines: - The reviews shall be performed over the portions of the component that were modified as a result of the Change Request. - New components should include SWC Owner and/or SWC Design author and Integrator and/or SW Lead as apart of the Group Review Board (Source Code, Integration Manual, and Davinci Files) - Enter any rework required into the comment field and select No. When the rework is complete, review again using this same review sheet and select Yes. Add date and additional comment stating that the rework is completed. - To review a component with multiple source code files use the "Add Source" button to create a Source code tab for each source file. - .h file should be reviewed with the source file as part of the source file. Each peer review shall start with a clean copy of the latest peer review checklist template. Before the peer review, the change owner shall: o Review the previous component peer review and copy any relevant comments to the new review sheet. o Review all checklist items and make all corrections needed, so that the component is ready for peer review. The expectation is that peer review should find very few issues, because the change owner has already used the checklist to ensure the component changes are complete and correct. o Fill in all file name and version information as needed on peer review checklist tabs (file names may be copied from the previous peer review where appropriate) o Fill in checklist answers (Yes/No/NA pulldowns) ONLY on those items which are NA for the current change. All other checklist items should be blank going into the review meeting. During the peer review meeting: o For each page of the review, first review the items already marked as N/A for this change, to confirm that reviewers agree with this assessment; change the checklist box to blank if it is found that the item does apply. o Then review the items with the checklist box blank. After reviewing each of these items, the checklist box will be marked as "Yes", or the checklist box will be marked as "No" with needed rework indicated or with rationale indicated. o If any items are marked "No" with rationale indicated, this must be approved by a software supervisor or the software manager; there is a line in the "Review Board" section of each tab to indicate who approved the "No" items on that tab.