Blog
Our team balked at code reviews at first. Now we can't imagine working without Code Collaborator.
How does CodeCollaborator stack up?
Compare Code Collaborator with:
|
Smart Bear CodeCollaborator |
Smart Bear CodeReviewer |
||
|---|---|---|---|
 |
Cross-platform |
 |
Windows-only |
|
|
Custom fields & workflow |
|
Only one defect field; no review fields or workflow options |
|
|
Review & defect metrics collected automatically |
|
No metrics |
|
|
Customizable reports |
|
No reports |
Detailed Comparison
- Clients & Platforms
- Version Control Integration
- Reviews & Files
- General Review Process
- Metrics & Reporting
- Administrative Control
| Clients & Platforms | ||
|
Smart Bear CodeCollaborator |
Smart Bear CodeReviewer |
|
|---|---|---|
| Support for Windows, Linux, Solaris, and Mac OS X | Yes | No Windows only |
| Command-line user interface | Yes | No |
| Web-based user interface | Yes | No |
| Rich-client user interface | Yes | Yes |
| Eclipse plug-in integration | Yes | No |
| Web Services API for system integration, reporting, and automation | Yes Public, documented API exposes the entire the data model. Free Java libraries included. Additional sample code included. | No |
| SSL Support | Yes | No |
| Works with any editor or IDE | Yes | Yes |
| Works outside an editor or IDE | Yes | Yes |
| Integration with CodePickle allowing developers to work on multiple simultaneous changes to source code files without being blocked until reviews are returned | Yes Windows only, for now | Yes |
| Serverless over LAN networks | No | Yes |
| Supports distributed developers over WAN networks | Yes | Yes Using optional, free Web Services proxy server |
| Version Control Integration | ||
|
Smart Bear CodeCollaborator |
Smart Bear CodeReviewer |
|
| Perforce Integration | Yes | Yes |
| Perforce P4Win/P4V Plugin | Yes | No However, Perforce changelists are detected automatically by the client. |
| ClearCase Integration | Yes | Yes |
| Subversion Integration | Yes | Yes |
| CVS Integration | Yes | Yes |
| Vault Integration | Yes | Yes |
| MKS Integration | No coming soon! | No |
| Reviews & Files | ||
|
Smart Bear CodeCollaborator |
Smart Bear CodeReviewer |
|
| Supports reviews of local changes not yet committed to version control | Yes | Yes |
| Supports reviews of changes already committed to version control | Yes | Yes |
| Can review file differences rather than complete file inspections | Yes | Yes |
| Can perform whole-file inspections | Yes | Yes |
| Automatically detects local file changes | Yes Via version control integration | Yes Via version control integration |
| Packages local file contents and differences for delivery | Yes | Yes |
| Can search for completed reviews based on file name or type | Yes | No |
| General Review Process | ||
|
Smart Bear CodeCollaborator |
Smart Bear CodeReviewer |
|
| Supports multiple simultaneous review participants | Yes | No |
| Supports multiple participants serially | Yes | Yes |
| Tracks comments made during code review | Yes | Yes |
| Tracks defects found during code review | Yes | No Negative comments block check-in but are not specially tracked for metrics |
| Chat-style comment history showing dialogue for each thread of conversation | Yes | Yes |
| Can view proposed code changes in color-coded before/after view | Yes | Yes |
| Can leave comments on individual lines of code | Yes | Yes |
| Can export proposed changes on reviewer's machine for testing | Yes | Yes |
| Supports review checklists | Yes | Yes |
| Supports configurable review participant roles for workflow and reporting | Yes | No |
| Metrics & Reporting | ||
|
Smart Bear CodeCollaborator |
Smart Bear CodeReviewer |
|
| Builds audit trail of review communication | Yes | Yes |
| Saves audit trail along with actual file changes | Yes Audit trails and review metrics available in data or Web Services | Yes Audit trails stored in the version control check-in comment |
| Automatically collects metrics for man-hours/kLOC, defects/kLOC, and man-hours/kLOC | Yes | No |
| Built-in reporting | Yes Reporting system built-in; external report tools can use database or Web Services interface | No |
| Custom reports | Yes In-product custom reports as well as 3rd-party tools against the database | Yes XML report files generated; also available through CodeReports |
| Sophisticated searching, e.g. finding all reviews of a certain file, or done by a certain user, or searching within comment or defect text | Yes | Yes |
| Administrative Control | ||
|
Smart Bear CodeCollaborator |
Smart Bear CodeReviewer |
|
| Allows custom fields for defects to track e.g. severity, type, or phase-injected | Yes | No |
| Allows custom fields for reviews to track e.g. project, phase, or relevant bug ID's | Yes | No |
| Admin option preventing developers from checking in code before it is reviewed | Yes Using supplied SCM server triggers | Yes Users check in code from the product |
| Permits only certain users to have access to administer server configuration | Yes | No |
| Can restrict viewing reviews to certain users | Yes | No |
| Can track and administrate all current reviews | Yes | Yes |
| Can administer user lists | Yes | Yes |
| Can authenticate from LDAP/ActiveDirectory instead of maintaining user list | Yes | No But user list is determined automatically |