:::danger
Copy the contents of this HackMD page and make your own HackMD page for the person you are writing the feedback.
:::
[Link to the lesson](https://hackmd.io/Z-orfb4iTlaoiY-C2-Xqdw)

# Peer review template

## Name of the person reviewing
[Miguel F. Marrero Tarrau]
## Name of the project being reviewed
[ FAIR-Battery]
[https://github.com/SanliFaez/FAIR-Battery#the-fair-battery-project]

**Provide feedback in the form of recommendations, observations, suggestions, or questions**
- For each feedback session:
    - Write a minimum of 5 points where you think there is room for improvement
    - Write a minimum of 3 aspects you like about the project

### Give feedback on your hardware documentation

**Look for the following:**
- Is the project findable or accessible?
- Check if the readme contains an introduction with a clear value proposition?
- Check if you can figure out easy to navigate is the project via the folders
- Check if assembly instructions are published;
- Check if the bill of materials is published;
- There is some contribution guidance is published;
- published files are shared in original format (for example Gerber files or cad files)
- use of versioning control system
- use of issue management system
- all this information is published under a license allowing commercial reuse.

### Give feedback on your project
The main goal is to see if you have set up a systematic plan to realize your project vision and if it's realistic in terms of time and scope.
Instructions:
- Is there a list of priorities or hypothesis
    - This could be in the form of a roadmap
    - or a progress board with a list of features
    - or GitHub issues
    - (Some kind of project documentation that reflects your thinking)
- Is there consistency between ideas and expectations, and ongoing prototyping activities
- Do you think these prioritized tasks are feasible during the academy or the next 3 months
    - Or would you recommend breaking down the project into smaller iterations

<!-- ### Give feedback about project openness
- Is the project findable or accessible?
- Is it clear what is the status of the project? (early stage, mature stage focused on documentation)
- Does the README provides the following:
    - Clear, straightforward, and to the point value proposition
    - Is there a bill of materials or a draft of a bill of materials
    - design files are published

* assembly instructions are published
* a bill of materials is published
* a contribution guide is published
* published files are shared in original format
* use of versioning control system
* use of issue management system
* All this information is published under a license allowing commercial reuse. -->