Reviewable
Atlassian Crucible
CodeRabbit
Review Board
Phabricator
Gerrit Code Review
MergeBoard
GitHub
RepDB
RepDB is a one-time-purchase exercise dataset for developers building fitness and workout apps โ not a subscription, not a rate-limited API. You download the data once and own it: JSON (and SQLite on the higher tier), WebP images, and full EN/DE/ES translations, with no per-request billing and no dependency on our servers staying up.
A free tier includes 400 exercises with flat-style 512ร512 images, attribution-licensed for commercial in-app use. The Starter tier ($199) adds the full catalog in classic white-background style. Standard ($399) adds transparent 1024px images, looping animations, exercise relations (similar/progressions/regressions), workout templates, and embeddings โ exclusive to that tier.
Every exercise includes muscle-group highlighting, equipment/muscle icons, MET values, and safety/goal tags. Compared to GIF- or JPG-based competitor APIs, RepDB images are transparent WebP with no watermarks, so they drop into any app UI without a white box around them.
Reviewable RepDBRepDB's answer:
RepDB is sold as a one-time download, not a metered API โ you own the JSON/SQLite data and WebP images outright, with no rate limits, no per-request billing, and no risk of the vendor cutting off access. It's also the only dataset in this space with EN/DE/ES translations, transparent (alpha-channel) images with no watermark, muscle-group highlighting, safety/goal tags, and looping animations on the higher tier.
RepDB's answer:
RepDB grew out of a consumer workout app its creator was building solo. Sourcing exercise images and data meant either paying for a subscription API with usage caps and no caching rights, or producing everything from scratch. The illustrated, multi-language dataset was built for us first, then split out as its own product once it became clear other indie developers had the same problem and preferred to buy the data outright rather than rent it through an API.
RepDB's answer:
Most alternatives are subscription APIs โ you pay monthly, you're capped on requests, and ExerciseDB's terms of use explicitly forbid caching or storing the data at all, so every image render is a live paid API call. RepDB is the opposite: pay once, download the files, self-host with zero ongoing dependency. It's also the only option offering true DE/ES localization and transparent images instead of a white box behind every exercise.
RepDB's answer:
Solo developers and small teams building fitness or workout-tracking apps (iOS, Android, web) who need licensed exercise images and structured exercise data, but don't want to build their own media pipeline or depend on a rate-limited third-party API.
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.io โ Code review for GitHub repositories, free for public or personal repos. - Source: dev.to / over 2 years ago
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 / almost 3 years ago
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 / almost 3 years ago
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 / about 3 years ago
>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 / about 3 years ago
Atlassian Crucible - Collaborative peer code review tool.
CodeRabbit - Unleash AI on Your Code Reviews with CodeRabbit
Review Board - Stress-free code review for teams of all sizes
Phabricator - Phacility - Phabricator
Gerrit Code Review - OpenSource Git Code Review Tool
MergeBoard - MergeBoard is the first code review tool to display code changes in a smart way. Its unique features help developers spend less time on code reviews and catch more bugs.
