When setting up your code review process, start by writing down some ground rules. Cover the basics like what you're trying to achieve, how to give feedback constructively, and what's expected from both sides of the review. Good feedback is key. Encourage your team to be precise about what needs changing, stick to the facts, and suggest concrete improvements. Pick a tool that makes it easy to discuss code. GitHub, for instance, lets you comment on specific lines and have back-and-forth conversations about particular parts of the code. This keeps things organized and on-topic.

When developers clash over code review feedback, I focus on creating an environment of constructive dialogue. I encourage the team to approach feedback with a mindset of improvement rather than criticism. By organizing group discussions, I ensure both sides explain their reasoning clearly and respectfully. I also set guidelines for giving and receiving feedback, focusing on the solution rather than the problem. This open communication helps bridge the gap & everyone feels valued and aligned on the best coding practices.

Sometimes, there are multiple good ways to write a code in. But to avoid any clashes in feedback, its necessary to set some ground rules. Document folder structure, naming conventions and other basic things in repo. Enforce some rules using linters. With above configured, there would be only logical parts where conflicts can happen. Try to communicate logics, and flow with team first, before we start developing, knowing what we are developing or how it will be used is necessary. Picking the most flexible and optimum code is the best solution, these debates are good for product's betterment as well if done right.

Por regra, na equipe em que trabalho atualmente, nada sobe sem ser revisado, é importante que o desenvolvedor encontre regras e padr?es de desenvolvimento já aprovado e seguir com o que está documentado, padr?es de código, e as melhores práticas a serem seguidas. Ter uma base clara reduz o espa?o para interpreta??es diferentes e evite inven??es acima do definido.

Always try to mediate dialogue if you are in a position of supervision. But even as a peer or one of parties of the conflict, I do think that communication is the most effective strategy; trying to have an honest talk between both parties; whilst keeping things professional or reaching an agreement under professional terms is the most healthy way to approach it, asking for a third opinion and even getting into a team vote can help clear waters.