<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><!-- generator="wordpress/1.5.2" -->
<rss version="2.0" 
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/">
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Code Reviews In The Real-World</title>
	<link>http://blog.qualityaspect.com/2006/07/10/code-reviews-in-the-real-world/</link>
	<description>Lidor Wyssocky's Blog on Optimizing Software Development</description>
	<pubDate>Mon, 13 Oct 2008 04:29:05 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=1.5.2</generator>

	<item>
 		<title>Comment on Code Reviews In The Real-World by: Dion Dock</title>
		<link>http://blog.qualityaspect.com/2006/07/10/code-reviews-in-the-real-world/#comment-912</link>
		<pubDate>Wed, 12 Jul 2006 17:59:03 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://blog.qualityaspect.com/2006/07/10/code-reviews-in-the-real-world/#comment-912</guid>
					<description>What about the parallels between reviewing and testing?  If reviewing causes context switches, wouldn't testing do the same thing?  This has been typically solved by having a separate test team.  

What would be the effect of having a separate review team?  

I seem to recall reading that Dave Cutler reviewed checkins to the NT source base.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[	<p>What about the parallels between reviewing and testing?  If reviewing causes context switches, wouldn&#8217;t testing do the same thing?  This has been typically solved by having a separate test team.  </p>
	<p>What would be the effect of having a separate review team?  </p>
	<p>I seem to recall reading that Dave Cutler reviewed checkins to the NT source base.
</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
</channel>
</rss>
