---
# System prepended metadata

title: Peer Review

---

# Peer Review

 - Write a minimum of 5 points where you think there is room for improvement
— Tests apart zetten later, from issues
— Erbij zetten minimale skills om documentatie te volgen
— Image however niet in REPO kan, via GitHub user content
— License toevoegen - Via Github. Geen liability. 
— Roadmap link naar milestones
— Way for people to know what exactly is being worked on

- Write a minimum of 3 aspects you like about the project
— Goed vol issue bord. Maar niet duidelijk how to contribute. Pagina met “how to contribute”. + “Example Good first issue
— Tests duidelijk geschreven
— Good electronics section. Clear to follow.

## Activities for reviewers
<!-- ### Watch this 5 mins video on giving feedback
This will help you prepare for the peer review

{%youtube wtl5UrrgU8c%} -->
**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 open hardware documentation 

**Look for the following:**
- Is the project findable or accessible?
-- Not via Google

- Check if the readme contains an introduction with a clear value proposition?
— Mat:Yes. Image hoeven niet in REPO kan, via GitHub user content
— Mat: Why sectie - describe how this project contribute to the issues
— Mat: Explain how to upload the code to Arduino of link naar website die het uitlegt

- Check if you can figure out easy to navigate the project via the folders
— Yes 

- Check if assembly instructions are published
— Yes

- Check if the bill of materials is published
— Yes

- There is some contribution guidance is published
— No. 

- published files are shared in original format (for example Gerber files or cad files)
— Yes

- use of versioning control system
— Yes, Git. 

- use of issue management system
— Yes

- all this information is published under a license allowing commercial reuse.
— No

Give feedback on the project process

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 even more the project into smaller iterations
