Snowplow review guidelines

This page includes introductory material for an Analytics Instrumentation review, and is specific to Snowplow related reviews. For broader advice and general best practices for code reviews, refer to our code review guide.

Resources for reviewers

Review process

We recommend an Analytics Instrumentation review when a merge request (MR) involves changes in events or touches Snowplow related files.

Roles and process

The merge request author should

  • For frontend events, when relevant, add a screenshot of the event in the testing tool used.
  • For backend events, when relevant, add the output of the Snowplow Micro good events GET http://localhost:9090/micro/good (it might be a good idea to reset with GET http://localhost:9090/micro/reset first).
  • Add or update the event definition file according to the Event Dictionary Guide.

The Analytics Instrumentation reviewer should

  • Check that the event schema is correct.
  • Check the usage recommendations.
  • Check that an event definition file was created or updated in accordance with the Event Dictionary Guide.
  • If needed, check that the events are firing locally using one of the testing tools available.
  • Approve the MR, and relabel the MR with ~"analytics instrumentation::approved".
  • If the snowplow event mirrors a RedisHLL event, then tag @mdrussell to review if the payload is usable for this purpose.