Reviewable VS Mouse

Mouse

Mouse is a handheld computer input device that controls the cursor in the graphical user interface and can move and select the files, text and folders.

Landing page //
2019-01-03

Landing page //
2023-08-17

Reviewable -- what is the fastest way to check out your review code?

Mouse videos

+ Add

The Best Wireless Mice 2023 - Magic Mouse Alternatives

Category Popularity

0-100% (relative to Reviewable and Mouse)

Mouse

Code Collaboration

71 71%

Code Collaboration

29% 29

Developer Tools

48 48%

Developer Tools

52% 52

Code Review

71 71%

Code Review

29% 29

Git

100 100%

Git

0% 0

User comments

Share your experience with using Reviewable and Mouse. For example, how are they different and which one is better?

Social recommendations and mentions

Based on our record, Reviewable seems to be more popular. It has been mentiond 21 times since March 2021. We are tracking product recommendations and mentions on various public social media platforms and blogs. They can help you identify which product is more popular and what people think of it.

Reviewable mentions (21)

A list of SaaS, PaaS and IaaS offerings that have free tiers of interest to devops and infradev
Reviewable.io — Code review for GitHub repositories, free for public or personal repos. - Source: dev.to / 3 months ago
The GitHub for Code Review UI Needs Serious Innovation
Yep, I agree! I work at, and use, Reviewable (https://reviewable.io) and we're the best way to review code on GitHub because we've focused on making the whole process better at every step. We've improved diffing, not only for large files (we support larger files than GitHub does) but also for understanding that diff. Have you ever reviewed a PR twice, but the second time around all your comments are gone and you... - Source: Hacker News / 7 months ago
Software Engineering at Google
Https://reviewable.io is the earliest full-powered Critique alternative for GitHub. It supports some cool things Critique doesn't/didn't, such as reviewing multi-commit branches (also across history-rewriting force-push cleanups), and indicating exactly the nature of your comment (just FYI, or you want this to be changed before you'll give your approval). (I was an intern in the initial making of Critique, and... - Source: Hacker News / 9 months ago
Codereview: Should the Go project stop importing GitHub PRs?
The linux kernel, which is open source and does want contributors, is doing more-or-less just fine with an email-based PR and review flow. If it's an open source project, it should be using an open source review platform that allows improvements and specialization of the code hosting too. Using github, where the review tools are bad and can't be improved by an outsider, is a slap in the face to open source.... - Source: Hacker News / 10 months ago
Show HN: Visibly – More Collaborative and Efficient Code Reviews on GitHub
>See reviewer presence so that you can see if someone is already reviewing and avoid unnecessary pings. >Visibly values privacy and security above all else These two things seem squarely at odds. Personally, I don't want my code review tool announcing to developers when I'm looking at their PR. The fact that it's a Chrome extension would also be a big blocker for me. I run a dev team, and I wouldn't... - Source: Hacker News / 11 months ago