Checklist: Review as submitter

Published on 30 March 2025 About 2 min reading time

Topics: #checklist #code review #review

This is a checklist for reviews from the perspective of submitter (see also the reviewer part). It’s minimalistic and focuses on the soft side of the topic, not on the technicalities and rigor of the process. The goal is to be applicable in general context, but it’s targetted at code reviews specifically.

Checklist #

Go through this before clicking the “Create pull request”/"Publish page" button.

QuickExpanded

Performed self-review in the tool I review others.
The work was tested, works, and I am satisfied with it, or it’s explicitly noted and explained if not.
The work is reasonably small and conveniently reviewable.
Provided context, reasoning and guidance if non-trivial.

I performed a self-review of the submitted work using the same tool I use to review work of others.
The work was tested and does what it is supposed to do and it is written in a way that I am satisfied with. If not, it is explicitly noted, and an explanation is provided.
The work is reasonably small and conveniently reviewable.
If the work is non-trivial, the pull request description, commit messages, or self-review comments include context, the reasoning behind decisions, and guidance for reviewers.

Resources