Joseph Doherty
5f75cd4dab
Adapts the code-reviews convention (process, README generator, template) from the ScadaBridge app model (per-src/-module, Akka conventions) to scadaproj's reality: six shared libraries reviewed against their components/ specs. - REVIEW-PROCESS.md: review unit is a library; library->component-spec mapping; checklist re-targeted for reusable .NET libs (public API/semver, packaging & dependency hygiene, spec/shared-contract adherence) instead of actor/supervision. - _template/findings.md: library/packages/component-spec/shared-contract header. - regen-readme.py: per-library prose, data-driven Summary, '-' for unreviewed. - Seed Auth/Theme/Health/Telemetry/Configuration/Audit findings stubs (0 findings). - README.md generated; --check passes.
2.7 KiB
Code Reviews
Comprehensive, per-library code reviews of the ZB.MOM.WW.* shared libraries hosted
in this repo. Each library (one self-contained .slnx at the repo root) has its own
folder containing a findings.md. This README is the aggregated index — the single
place to see all outstanding work.
Generated by
regen-readme.pyfrom the per-libraryfindings.mdfiles. Do not edit by hand — edit the findings files and re-run the script.
How it works
- Reviews are performed one library at a time against a fixed checklist.
- Each library is reviewed against its normalized component spec under
components/. - Every finding is recorded in the library's
findings.mdwith a severity and status. - Findings are never deleted — they are closed by changing their status, keeping a full audit trail.
- This README aggregates every pending finding (
Open/In Progress) across all libraries.
See REVIEW-PROCESS.md for the full procedure: the review checklist, severity definitions, finding format, the library → component-spec mapping, and how to mark items resolved.
Layout
code-reviews/
├── README.md # this file — process overview + pending findings
├── REVIEW-PROCESS.md # how to perform a review and track findings
├── regen-readme.py # regenerates this README from the findings files
├── _template/findings.md # copy-this template for a library review
└── <Library>/findings.md # one folder per ZB.MOM.WW.* shared library
Summary
0 of 6 libraries reviewed. 0 pending findings across all libraries.
| Severity | Open findings |
|---|---|
| Critical | 0 |
| High | 0 |
| Medium | 0 |
| Low | 0 |
| Total | 0 |
Library Status
| Library | Last reviewed | Commit | Open (C/H/M/L) | Open | Total |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Audit | — | — | 0/0/0/0 | 0 | 0 |
| Auth | — | — | 0/0/0/0 | 0 | 0 |
| Configuration | — | — | 0/0/0/0 | 0 | 0 |
| Health | — | — | 0/0/0/0 | 0 | 0 |
| Telemetry | — | — | 0/0/0/0 | 0 | 0 |
| Theme | — | — | 0/0/0/0 | 0 | 0 |
Pending Findings
Every Open / In Progress finding across all libraries, highest severity first.
Resolved findings drop off this list but remain recorded in their library's
findings.md (see REVIEW-PROCESS.md §4–§5). Full detail —
description, location, recommendation — lives in the library's findings.md.
Critical (0)
None open.
High (0)
None open.
Medium (0)
None open.
Low (0)
None open.