comiiit

REVIEW.en.md

@@ -0,0 +1,89 @@
+# 📋 Review workflow — Review and content control
+
+## Process
+
+```
+Draft ──→ Self-review ──→ Peer review ──→ Approval ──→ Merged
+  ↑                                                    │
+  └────────────── Feedback loop ───────────────────────┘
+```
+
+## Phases
+
+### 1. Draft
+
+- Author creates new content / edits existing
+- Mark files as `[draft]` in the commit message note
+- Goal: capture ideas, structure, and facts
+
+### 2. Self-review (author)
+
+- [ ] Is the content **understandable**? Would a junior understand it?
+- [ ] Are the **facts correct**? Verify against sources / official documentation
+- [ ] Are **sources** cited? (links in `sources/`)
+- [ ] Is the **structure consistent** with the rest of the KB?
+- [ ] Are **abbreviations** explained?
+- [ ] **Spelling and grammar**
+- [ ] Does the **tone** match — factual, without subjective opinions
+- [ ] Does it contain **actionable best practices**, not just theory
+
+### 3. Peer review (colleague / reviewer)
+
+- Author requests a review (PR / issue / @mention)
+- Reviewer checks:
+  - **Technical accuracy** — are data and concepts valid?
+  - **Completeness** — is anything important missing?
+  - **Impartiality** — does it not favor one vendor without reason?
+  - **Currency** — is any information outdated?
+
+**Review template:**
+
+```
+## Review: [file name]
+
+### Technical accuracy
+- [ ] Facts are correct
+- [ ] Recommendations are appropriate
+- [ ] Cited sources are relevant
+
+### Structure and form
+- [ ] Logical structure
+- [ ] Consistent formatting
+- [ ] Language is understandable
+
+### Comments
+- [ ] [comment 1]
+- [ ] [comment 2]
+
+### Verdict
+- [ ] Approved
+- [ ] Approved with reservations (see comments)
+- [ ] Rejected (reason: …)
+```
+
+### 4. Approval
+
+- Approves: author + at least 1 peer reviewer
+- After approval, content is considered `[done]`
+- Changes after approval require a new review cycle
+
+### 5. Merged / Published
+
+- Content is considered current and trustworthy
+- If a source in `sources/` is marked `[done]`, it confirms processing
+
+## File states
+
+| Status | Meaning |
+|--------|--------|
+| `[draft]` | In progress, not yet reviewed |
+| `[in-review]` | Peer review in progress |
+| `[done]` | Approved, current |
+| `[outdated]` | Outdated, awaiting revision |
+| `[deprecated]` | Replaced by another document |
+
+## Regular revision
+
+- **Quarterly** — check currency of the entire KB
+- **Trigger** — new tool version, architecture change, EOL technology
+- Each file should have a **last revision date** in its footer