ZH-348 - Add Reviewer's Checklist

[M-casado]

Summary

Types of changes

• Bug fix (non-breaking change which fixes an issue)
• New content (non-breaking change which adds new content)
• Modified content (non-breaking change which modifies existing content)
• Breaking change (fix or feature that would cause existing functionality to not work as expected)

Motivation and Context

References

https://app.zenhub.com/workspaces/t43-gdi-sops-667c1c5532726a00b93d51e4/issues/zh/348

Changes Introduced

• Updated requirements to suit for higher python versions
• Updated the test SOP that was missing a table row
• Added the Checklist documentation for reviewers

Review

No

Checklist:

General Compliance:

• My changes follow the code style of this project (GDI SOP Style Guide) and the file naming conventions of the file accessioning proposal.
• I have verified that all new updated content is accessible, including checking that all external references are readable (i.e., no broken links). These may include references to external resources that should be resolvable, and internal references among SOPs.
• I have properly added this PR's changes to the repository CHANGELOG.md.

Only applicable if the PR includes new, or changes to, GDI SOPs (i.e., documents at sops/):

• My SOP-related changes adhere to the Generic SOP Template, including format and required fields.
• I have consulted the Charter, ISM, and ORR documents to ensure compliance.
• I am complying with the established procedure for SOP creations and modifications, including respecting review phases and notifying needed contributors for reviews.

[M-casado]

As mentioned in previous PRs, the workflow of the index table will fail because there are no SOPs. It's expected.

[elisavettorstensson]

The SOP Review Checklist is well-written, detailed, and on point. I have left a few comments with minor issues. Good job!

[elisavettorstensson]

I believe under this section you should include all the parts of the SOP template where the "text is required". If that’s the case, both the "Document History" and the "Glossary" sections in the SOP template should be fully completed.

[M-casado]

Do you mean whole sections that are required? I added that but in the 1st section:

    - **Required Sections**: Ensure the SOP includes the required sections (e.g., ``Index`` or ``Procedures``).

Also had these rules automated in the section Linting Script. Would you add also the list of "This section, this section, and this section, are required"?

[M-casado]

Ideally we would have all these things automated, so that the rules of "what is required" live inside the scripts I made to automate it, and that way no human has to go and check every bit that is required.

[GabiRinck]

Many thanks, Marcos. This looks like a really useful document. I just added a few minor comments & suggestions.

[jmenglund]

Looks good! Just added a very minor comment.