Skip to content

Review Checklist

A review checklist is useful only if it catches the real ways this package can drift.

For bijux-proteomics-lab, review has to separate workflow convenience from durable operator truth. A fast lab-facing change is still wrong if the record becomes harder to reconstruct.

Review Model

flowchart TB
    review["review proposed lab change"]
    layer{"planning meaning, outcome meaning, or storage detail?"}
    proof{"promotion and prerequisite cases still defended?"}
    record{"durable record still aligns with shared contracts?"}
    approve["ready to approve"]

    review --> layer
    layer --> proof
    proof -->|yes| record
    proof -->|no| block1["keep reviewing"]
    record -->|yes| approve
    record -->|no| block2["keep reviewing"]

This checklist is useful only if it catches when operator-facing clarity is being traded away for implementation convenience.

Review Rules

  • ask whether the change alters planning meaning, outcome meaning, or only storage detail
  • check promotion and prerequisite examples before approval
  • verify that durable records still align with shared contracts

First Proof Check

  • packages/bijux-proteomics-lab/tests
  • src/bijux_proteomics_lab/planning.py and outcomes.py
  • src/bijux_proteomics_lab/repositories.py and serialization.py

Design Pressure

The easy mistake is to approve a change because the assay loop still runs, while the planning history or promotion path has become harder to explain after the fact.