I would like to have a tree view where I can see all the files at a glance, and, more importantly, switch back a forth between them. I find it hard to follow the code in Github's UX.
Also, Fisheye/Crucible gives you more flexibility to edit the review, by allowing you to remove files, and add or remove commits. Github PRs are based on branches, while Fisheye/Crucible code reviews are based on commits; it is an entire paradigm shift that gives the user more control. For example, I can create two separate reviews from the same branch on Crucible; that's impossible on Github.
We have used GH as a review platform for an open-source project, but they tend to be relatively minor PRs. If they got hairier, we'd probably find something else.
Personally, I really don't like having a gazillion different tools. If we can use one tool for several purposes, then that's what I prefer. If the tool becomes too cumbersome, then I'll work with something more specialized.
I honestly don't know how much our org paid for it though.
https://github.com/torvalds/linux/pull/17#issuecomment-56599...
Discussed at:
For me, the biggest improvement would be the tree-view you get in Fisheye/Crucible. It's so hard to get a grasp on large refactoring PRs on GitHub.
[1]: https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/better-pull-r...
If it's small PR or PR's from trusted sources it's not an problem but once it's bigger and from a third party reviewing it can easily become much more annoying then it should.
Besides UX aspects on major offender IMHO is the text based diff algorithm. I had to often changes where you could have created a easily readable diff but non content aware git diffs just produced total garbage.