Bitbucket Pull Request vs. Crucible for Code Review

Question

Please could someone point me to a discussion around -

1) Benefits of using Crucible over Bitbucket (Server) Pull Request?

2) Integration of Crucible with Bitbucket Pull Request

I tried searching one but to no avail. Apologies, if it already exists.

We are evaluating these 2 tools for automating our code review process; ensuring code reviews can happen before committing to master branch.

Any expert advice on this will be greatly appreciated.

Many thanks.

Kind regards!

Skipton

Answer 1

Crucible is a tool for post-commit code review, whereas pull request are a tool for pre-merge code review.

If you can do pull requests, then forget about Crucible, it is meant for workflows and VCS that don't work with pull requests.

Then if you have pull requests, you already have code reviews, and you don't need Crucible (you actually already "have" it because it is part of the pull request workflow with bitbucket, it's just not called Crucible).

Skitter

As per today's feature list of Crucible, it does pre-merge code review. "Review code before check-in and ensure any code going into production has been reviewed." atlassian.com/software/crucible/features – Phlyctena

Answer 2

There are a handful of differences between the two, even if you're just doing pull requests. Two big ones that stand out for me are:

• Bitbucket does not have syntax highlighting
• Since Crucible doesn't have to be just pull requests, if you're merging a branch but don't need all of the changes to be reviewed, you can remove those irrelevant files from the code review.

I think there are various other small differences beyond this.

Calorifacient