Which code review tools provide the most customizable code review workflows?

Ultimately, the best tool for your team depends on factors like your existing infrastructure, integration needs, and team preferences. It's often helpful to try a few options and see which one fits your workflow best. Storage: GitHub: Offers built-in code review features like pull requests, inline commenting, and merge approvals. Bitbucket: Similar to GitHub, it provides code review functionalities including pull requests and inline commenting. Review: sonarqube

The editor developers use to write their code is likely the most comfortable and flexible tool for reviewing code and resolving review comments. Most IDEs have code review features built in that hook to a VCS. Encourage code review to be handled inside the IDE and see how your team feels about it.

Some of the code review tools that provide highly customizable code review workflows are Gerrit, Crucible, and Review Board. These tools allow teams to tailor their code review processes to fit their specific needs and requirements.

Think of a code review tool that's like a versatile toolbox, fitting seamlessly into our team's workflow. It offers customizable features to adapt to different review needs, making collaboration smoother and more efficient.

One software that I found helpful was sonarqube. SonarQube is an open-source platform developed by SonarSource for continuous inspection of code quality to perform automatic reviews with static of code to detect bugs and code smells

Other software that I like and find helpful is code climate. - Code climate helps to write pure code. - It estimates code complexity which is tells you about tech debt accumulation - It can be easily setup and and integrated with GitHub. However, I have found that code climate is suitable for smaller organizations (or medium sized codebase) and SonarQube is more appropriate for enterprise-level code (larger codebase) for scalability purpose.

Jenkins is a Java-based open-source automation platform with plugins designed for continuous integration. That's the best preference for me.

I have used GitLab for the majority of my work, and one of its primary strengths is the intuitive and user-friendly interface of its Merge Requests, which significantly enhances the developer experience. GitLab recognizes that developers have different preferences and offers various themes, including a popular dark mode option. This customization is not just aesthetic; it helps reduce eye strain and improve comfort during long coding sessions. Additionally, users can personalize their dashboards by rearranging widgets and panels to prioritize the information most relevant to their roles and responsibilities. This level of personalization helps create a more productive and enjoyable work environment.

GitLab offers several features and integrations that can facilitate code review for user-friendly interfaces: Merge Requests: GitLab's Merge Requests feature allows developers to propose changes to the codebase and request feedback from their peers. Reviewers can leave comments directly on the diff, discussing specific lines of code or overall design choices. Code Review Workflow: GitLab provides customizable workflows for code review, allowing teams to define their own review process. This can include requirements such as a minimum number of approvals before a merge. Code Quality Reports: GitLab integrates with various code quality analysis tools, such as SonarQube.

Modern static code analysis tools allow you to define your own rules or at least set thresholds for different properties. Personally, I love using SonarQube to scan my code as it is industry-standard and developer-oriented. All features are created to make it easy for developers to spot their mistakes before it's too late. It is highly extensible through custom quality gates, allowing you to define your levels for various properties. Also, if certain rules do not apply to your project - you can easily disable them.