liveBook · Manning

Reviewer pool

As explained in "Looks Good to Me"

A group of people eligible to review and approve proposed code changes.

A reviewer pool is the group of people eligible to review and approve proposed pull requests. A team can make approval broadly available or restrict it by role, permission, or pull-request type. section 3.3.4

When shaping the pool, decide:

  • Whether everyone who writes or reads code can approve, or whether approval depends on seniority or role. section 3.3.4
  • Whether managers, tech leads, program managers, and quality assurance engineers receive approval privileges. section 3.3.4
  • Whether tooling supports binary permissions or finer rules for viewing and approving particular pull requests. section 3.3.4

Informational reviewers with accountability

An informational reviewer may approve a pull request while accepting responsibility for fixing any resulting problem. This can increase accountability, accelerate new-team-member contribution, and strengthen cohesion. section 3.3.4

How "Looks Good to Me" covers it

How deep it goes
Compares broad, role-based, and granular permission choices, but stops short of prescribing one universal policy.
Examples
Uses team-role decisions and an informational-reviewer policy that makes approvers responsible for resulting bug fixes.
What you can do after
Operate/configure approval access according to team roles, tooling capabilities, and desired accountability.
How it connects
Connects pull requests, approval permissions, informational reviewers, code review, and team accountability.

Related concepts

This explainer was generated by Manning's knowledge graph from the text of "Looks Good to Me". The section links point to the parts of the book it draws on.