GitHub vs Review Board

Overview

GitHub

Stacks295.6K

Followers259.0K

Votes10.4K

Review Board

Stacks19

Followers52

Votes6

GitHub Stars1.7K

Forks435

GitHub vs Review Board: What are the differences?

GitHub and Review Board are two popular tools used in software development for managing and reviewing code changes. While both serve a similar purpose, there are several key differences between the two.

Integration with Version Control Systems: One major difference between GitHub and Review Board is their integration with version control systems. GitHub is primarily designed to work with Git, a distributed version control system. On the other hand, Review Board supports various version control systems like Git, Mercurial, Subversion, and Perforce, providing more flexibility for teams using different VCS.
Online Code Hosting vs. Self-Hosted: GitHub is a cloud-based platform that offers online code hosting for open-source and private projects. It provides a user-friendly interface and takes care of setting up the infrastructure for code repositories. In contrast, Review Board is a self-hosted code review tool that requires installation on a server. It provides full control over the code review process but requires more setup and maintenance efforts.
Pull Request Workflow vs. Traditional Review: GitHub has a pull request workflow, where developers can create a branch, make changes, and submit a pull request for review. Reviewers can comment on specific lines of code and give approvals or suggestions before merging the changes. Review Board, on the other hand, follows a more traditional review process where reviewers manually upload diffs and provide comments. This approach allows for more flexibility, but it may require additional steps to manage the review process.
Community and Collaboration Features: GitHub has a strong focus on community and collaboration features. It allows developers to easily fork, clone, and collaborate on open-source projects. It also provides social features like following users, starring repositories, and contributing to public projects. Review Board, on the other hand, is more focused on the code review process itself and does not offer the same level of community and collaboration features.
Extensibility and Integration: GitHub provides a rich ecosystem of integrations and extensions. It offers a marketplace of apps and integrations that can be used to extend its functionality. This allows teams to integrate their favorite tools like build systems, project management software, and continuous integration services into their development workflow. Review Board also supports extensions, but its ecosystem is not as extensive as GitHub's.
Commercial vs. Open Source: GitHub offers both free and paid plans, with additional features and support for private repositories available in paid plans. It is primarily a commercial product owned by Microsoft. Review Board, on the other hand, is open-source software and can be used and modified freely. It is supported by a community of contributors and does not require any licensing fees.

In Summary, GitHub and Review Board differ in terms of integration with version control systems, online code hosting vs. self-hosted, pull request workflow vs. traditional review, community and collaboration features, extensibility and integration options, and commercial vs. open-source nature.

Share your Stack

Help developers discover the tools you use. Get visibility for your team's tech choices and contribute to the community's knowledge.

View Docs

CLI (Node.js)

Manual

Advice on GitHub, Review Board

Anonymous

May 25, 2020

Decided

Gitlab as A LOT of features that GitHub and Azure DevOps are missing. Even if both GH and Azure are backed by Microsoft, GitLab being open source has a faster upgrade rate and the hosted by gitlab.com solution seems more appealing than anything else! Quick win: the UI is way better and the Pipeline is way easier to setup on GitLab!

624k views624k

Comments

Weverton

CTO at SourceLevel

Jul 28, 2020

Review

Using an inclusive language is crucial for fostering a diverse culture. Git has changed the naming conventions to be more language-inclusive, and so you should change. Our development tools, like GitHub and GitLab, already supports the change.

SourceLevel deals very nicely with repositories that changed the master branch to a more appropriate word. Besides, you can use the grep linter the look for exclusive terms contained in the source code.

As the inclusive language gap may happen in other aspects of our lives, have you already thought about them?

944k views944k

Comments

Weverton

CTO at SourceLevel

Aug 3, 2020

Review

Do you review your Pull/Merge Request before assigning Reviewers?

If you work in a team opening a Pull Request (or Merge Request) looks appropriate. However, have you ever thought about opening a Pull/Merge Request when working by yourself? Here's a checklist of things you can review in your own:

Pick the correct target branch
Make Drafts explicit
Name things properly
Ask help for tools
Remove the noise
Fetch necessary data
Understand Mergeability
Pass the message
Add screenshots
Be found in the future
Comment inline in your changes

Read the blog post for more detailed explanation for each item :D

What else do you review before asking for code review?

1.19M views1.19M

Comments

Detailed Comparison

GitHub	Review Board
GitHub is the best place to share code with friends, co-workers, classmates, and complete strangers. Over three million people use GitHub to build amazing things together.	Review Board is an open source, web-based code and document review tool built to help companies, open source projects, and other organizations keep their quality high and their bug count low.
Command instructions; Source browser; Git powered wikis; Integrated issue tracking; Code reviews with inline comments; Compare view; Newsfeed; Followers; Developer profiles; Autocompletion for @username mentions	Syntax-highlighted diffs; Smarter indentation handling; Moved code detection; Know exactly what function or class you're in; See more context in your diffs; Multi-line commenting in diffs/text files; Track status of automated builds and reviews
Statistics
GitHub Stars -	GitHub Stars 1.7K
GitHub Forks -	GitHub Forks 435
Stacks 295.6K	Stacks 19
Followers 259.0K	Followers 52
Votes 10.4K	Votes 6
Pros & Cons
Pros 1774 Open source friendly 1463 Easy source control 1254 Nice UI 1137 Great for team collaboration 868 Easy setup Cons 56 Owned by micrcosoft 38 Expensive for lone developers that want private repos 15 Relatively slow product/feature release cadence 10 API scoping could be better 9 Only 3 collaborators for private repos	Pros 3 Simple to use. Great UI 1 Review Bots 1 Open Source 1 Diff between review versions
Integrations
Grove Lighthouse Airbrake Codeship Bugsnag BugHerd Visual Studio Code HipChat CopperEgg Nitrous.IO	Travis CI Slack iDoneThis Bitbucket Git Azure DevOps CircleCI GitLab Trello AWS CodeCommit

What are some alternatives to GitHub, Review Board?

Bitbucket

Bitbucket gives teams one place to plan projects, collaborate on code, test and deploy, all with free private Git repositories. Teams choose Bitbucket because it has a superior Jira integration, built-in CI/CD, & is free for up to 5 users.

GitLab

GitLab offers git repository management, code reviews, issue tracking, activity feeds and wikis. Enterprises install GitLab on-premise and connect it with LDAP and Active Directory servers for secure authentication and authorization. A single GitLab server can handle more than 25,000 users but it is also possible to create a high availability setup with multiple active servers.

Code Climate

After each Git push, Code Climate analyzes your code for complexity, duplication, and common smells to determine changes in quality and surface technical debt hotspots.

Codacy

Codacy automates code reviews and monitors code quality on every commit and pull request on more than 40 programming languages reporting back the impact of every commit or PR, issues concerning code style, best practices and security.

RhodeCode

RhodeCode provides centralized control over distributed code repositories. Developers get code review tools and custom APIs that work in Mercurial, Git & SVN. Firms get unified security and user control so that their CTOs can sleep at night

AWS CodeCommit

CodeCommit eliminates the need to operate your own source control system or worry about scaling its infrastructure. You can use CodeCommit to securely store anything from source code to binaries, and it works seamlessly with your existing Git tools.

Phabricator

Phabricator is a collection of open source web applications that help software companies build better software.

Gogs

The goal of this project is to make the easiest, fastest and most painless way to set up a self-hosted Git service. With Go, this can be done in independent binary distribution across ALL platforms that Go supports, including Linux, Mac OS X, and Windows.

Gitea

Git with a cup of tea! Painless self-hosted all-in-one software development service, including Git hosting, code review, team collaboration, package registry and CI/CD. It published under the MIT license.

PullReview

PullReview helps Ruby and Rails developers to develop new features cleanly, on-time, and with confidence by automatically reviewing their code.

Related Comparisons

GitHub vs Review Board: What are the differences?

Integration with Version Control Systems: One major difference between GitHub and Review Board is their integration with version control systems. GitHub is primarily designed to work with Git, a distributed version control system. On the other hand, Review Board supports various version control systems like Git, Mercurial, Subversion, and Perforce, providing more flexibility for teams using different VCS.
Online Code Hosting vs. Self-Hosted: GitHub is a cloud-based platform that offers online code hosting for open-source and private projects. It provides a user-friendly interface and takes care of setting up the infrastructure for code repositories. In contrast, Review Board is a self-hosted code review tool that requires installation on a server. It provides full control over the code review process but requires more setup and maintenance efforts.
Pull Request Workflow vs. Traditional Review: GitHub has a pull request workflow, where developers can create a branch, make changes, and submit a pull request for review. Reviewers can comment on specific lines of code and give approvals or suggestions before merging the changes. Review Board, on the other hand, follows a more traditional review process where reviewers manually upload diffs and provide comments. This approach allows for more flexibility, but it may require additional steps to manage the review process.
Community and Collaboration Features: GitHub has a strong focus on community and collaboration features. It allows developers to easily fork, clone, and collaborate on open-source projects. It also provides social features like following users, starring repositories, and contributing to public projects. Review Board, on the other hand, is more focused on the code review process itself and does not offer the same level of community and collaboration features.
Extensibility and Integration: GitHub provides a rich ecosystem of integrations and extensions. It offers a marketplace of apps and integrations that can be used to extend its functionality. This allows teams to integrate their favorite tools like build systems, project management software, and continuous integration services into their development workflow. Review Board also supports extensions, but its ecosystem is not as extensive as GitHub's.
Commercial vs. Open Source: GitHub offers both free and paid plans, with additional features and support for private repositories available in paid plans. It is primarily a commercial product owned by Microsoft. Review Board, on the other hand, is open-source software and can be used and modified freely. It is supported by a community of contributors and does not require any licensing fees.

GitHub vs Review Board

Overview