Crucible vs. Upsource

Depends on the version control and devops process your development teams adopt. Git (via Bitbucket, GitHub, GitLab, etc...) has become the new industry norm, and using pull requests can often provide the same code review features Crucible is used for. However, if you require code review beyond change/diff based (i.e. via pull request), then Crucible allows you to review code with more granular control, such as on per file basis.

Incentivized

Upsource is the best review tool we've found but it still has some flaws. Notably, it makes reviewing small and quick changes less convenient than they need to be, and diff viewing (especially collaboratively) can be tedious.

It does handle larger, iterative reviews well. Especially when using a feature branch, Upsource will track that branch and automatically add all commits to the review. You can then review the branch as a whole, or look at a subset of diffs.

Incentivized

• Easily add comments, identify defects, gather peer input.
• 24/7 input from peers eases developer schedules and location independence.
• Email notifications filtered by group or individuals provide control of who gets notifications, and who can submit comments.

Incentivized

• Automatically watch git repositories
• Track all commits in a branch in a single commit
• Integrates with build server to report build status of specific commits when looking at reviews/commits
• Integrates with JetBrains IDEs
• Ability for reviewers to add comments inline and require comments to be resolved before approval
• Built in diff viewer, both stacked and side-by-side

Incentivized

• It can sometimes be a bit slow to load. A server reboot for us tends to solve that issue. I'm not sure if it is a server issue, or maybe Crucible may have some caching issues.
• I wish that you could easily stop the review creation process, rather than abandoning it.

Incentivized

• Creating and closing reviews isn't as quick as it could be. You must create a review, assign reviewers, approve and close. I wish there would be a quick review-approve-close for a commit where the change is simple and doesn't require multiple review iterations.
• Web based interface can be clunky, especially when looking at big diffs side-by-side
• JetBrains IDE integration is somehow less convenient than going using it in browser.

Incentivized

Good support overall being an Atlassian product, with options including free/paid official support and community provided help.

Incentivized

Gitlab and GitHub are very comparable to Crucible, and would probably be my first choice if those were the tools used for versioning as they are directly linked to git. Crucible was chosen by a current client and I had no choice in its selection. I would probably have chosen GitHub if given a say.

Incentivized

Compared to the other tools we evaluated, Upsource was the only tool that allowed distinct reviews without needing explicit pull requests while still being able to go in-depth when required. The diff viewer is serviceable and better than the alternatives, as well, especially the side-by-side viewer.

Incentivized

• I am not involved in the acquisition of Crucible so I cannot comment on the financial investment but I believe it is a necessary tool to have in any software shop, small or big.
• As a developer, having Crucible as the code review process is a great asset and will save time and reduce risks which I believe is a positive return of investment.

Incentivized

• Increased our code base quality
• Reduced the number of bugs found after deployment (bugs are found in review and fixed before deploy)
• Improved knowledge sharing

Incentivized