I've searched a little bit on the net to find a good guide on submitting and reviewing code reviews for my team. Any help is appreciated. More on stackoverflow.com

https://mtlynch.io/code-review-love/ Articulates this better than I ever could 🙂 More on reddit.com

Nice SEO boost.

The "Security" section is especially cringle, by the way.

More on reddit.com

Code reviews should be a collaborative experience, a conversation between equals. These parties' goals are aligned, aren't they? -- make the code better, learn, strengthen the team. You don't want "power dynamics" if you can avoid them. While the parties are equals, if the other party has more long-term responsibility for the code than you do, you should expect to defer to them more often. That doesn't mean you can't advocate for what you think is best, but respect their judgment. Some people debate how much "author's choice" is appropriate, but I think author vs. reviewer is a less useful distinction to make than this one (long-term responsible vs. not). Reviews are a conversation. One party shouldn't leave it saying "ugh, my reviewer _forced_ me to", or "ugh, the author _insisted_ on". Usually that's a sign that something's gone wrong on _both_ ends. Expect that after the first review comments, it's normal for there to be some amount of pushback on them, and then some amount of pushback to that, Can it sometimes go a few more volleys than we would have hoped? Yeah, sometimes, but again, I see it as ultimately a collaborative learning process. The important thing about "pushback" is that you have to say what you like about the way you're advocating to do it. Or else, be explicit: "you know, I just like it better this way, is that good enough?" and maybe it is, maybe it isn't. The reviewer in particular kinda controls how many threads of conversation are going to have to happen, and they should choose their battles. Not every idea for how the code could be slightly better is always worth mentioning. The review itself could become too burdensome. I admit I used to kind of put contributors to my library through hell.Sometimes comments you want to make are more productively handled by you sending your own followup changelist/pullrequest yourself. I think there are different views on this, but I feel we should use phrases like "Consider..." and "I'd rather not..." and "It's up to you but..." to mean what they actually mean. For example, if I say to you "Hmm, I would write foobar() here but either way is fine", it should be totally normal and expected for the other party to say "Ok, I think i won't" or just resolve the thread. I know that (and this might be cultural?) those are often just polite euphemisms for stronger feelings but, I don't know, I feel like we can survive just saying what we mean. For example if by "consider using the newer library" you really mean "I will think you're dumb if you don't use the newer library", then just say "I really think using the new library is the right thing to do." Important: If you find an honest opportunity to say "ooh this is good what you did here" or "oh, good point" or "overall this change is awesome, thanks" it is a really really really really really really really really smart move to do that. It is WAY better than periodically telling a teammate "the team values you" or some generic empty crap like that. And: why would you not want to reinforce good practices? More on reddit.com