Code Review as a Service • Hacker News Board

Re: Code Review as a Service

#231

Post by winterplace » Wed, Dec 22, 2021, 9:52 PM UTC

koblas wrote: post #97

alkonaut wrote: post #44

I'm all for this if the person reviewing my code will know the context, history and all the details and conversations we had as a team. But in order for that to work, I'd probably be taking most of this reviewer's time. And obviously in order for them to get up to speed with our practices, conventions, architecture, code style and whatnot, they'd probably need to start by doing a whole lot of development on our proje…

As somebody who's done a bunch of reviews on the platform you realize a bunch of things about development that we don't want to admit. When I review code for my own team (for my day job), there are many times where internal pressures on my time will make me prematurely stamp LGTM on one of my co-workers PRs that I trust. When I'm doing reviews on PullRequest I remove the "trust" marker in my review along with this st…

Hi David. Do you have an email address or a method of contact?

Re: Code Review as a Service

#232

Post by winterplace » Wed, Dec 22, 2021, 9:53 PM UTC

tyler_mann wrote: post #70

alkonaut wrote: post #44

I'm all for this if the person reviewing my code will know the context, history and all the details and conversations we had as a team. But in order for that to work, I'd probably be taking most of this reviewer's time. And obviously in order for them to get up to speed with our practices, conventions, architecture, code style and whatnot, they'd probably need to start by doing a whole lot of development on our proje…

Disclaimer, I'm the CTO @ PullRequest. One thing to note about our service is that we are not trying to replace your code review process if it is already working well and we strongly agree that knowledge transfer is a very important part of code review. ( We actually have code review metrics as well that help encourage and reward your internal code review process. ) However what we do believe and see on a daily basis…

Hi Tyler. Is there a reason why PullRequest Reviewers from Canada are also included as an allowed country? Because that country has good rule of law?

Re: Code Review as a Service

#233

Post by winterplace » Wed, Dec 22, 2021, 9:53 PM UTC

ddm379 wrote: post #111

gandutraveler wrote: post #48

On top of what others have already flagged this is a big no for any companies security & compliance. Why would any company share their private codebase ?

Disclaimer: I'm Dan Mateer, COO at PullRequest Great question; security and compliance is a very big consideration for our customers. All code review on PullRequest is done within the platform, engineers in the PullRequest network cannot clone branches like in a garden variety source control, and we have a number of tools to give clients as much control as possible as to what our platform and engineers in our network…

Hi Dan. Is there a reason why PullRequest Reviewers from Canada are also included as an allowed country? Because that country has good rule of law?

Re: Code Review as a Service

#234

Post by winterplace » Wed, Dec 22, 2021, 9:53 PM UTC

nick007 wrote: post #172

alkonaut wrote: post #44

I'm all for this if the person reviewing my code will know the context, history and all the details and conversations we had as a team. But in order for that to work, I'd probably be taking most of this reviewer's time. And obviously in order for them to get up to speed with our practices, conventions, architecture, code style and whatnot, they'd probably need to start by doing a whole lot of development on our proje…

I am a PullRequest user/customer. I shared some of your concerns when I first heard about them, and was admittedly the least on board them trying them vs the others on my team. In short, I didn't believe that an outsider could provide adequate reviews and that, at best, an outsider would supplement our internal review process. I was wrong, and have learned several things about code review from this company. 1. Once r…

Hi Nick. Is there a reason why PullRequest Reviewers from Canada are also included as an allowed country? Because that country has good rule of law?

Re: Code Review as a Service

#235

Post by joshgrib » Tue, Dec 28, 2021, 2:29 PM UTC

nathasm wrote: post #219

joshgrib wrote: post #159

Can someone give a solid and succinct review of doing this as a side-job? What was 1) the hourly pay, 2) language(s) you reviewed, and 3) how was the work?

Sure, I'd be happy to give you some insight and background. A little background: I've been doing software dev for 20+ years ranging from C++, Ruby (not Rails), front-end/full-stack dev. I make enough in my day job to be plenty happy. I won't comment on pay (it's good enough for me!) as I'm not sure if it's standardized across the board, but let me just say that I was going to start moonlighting since my current role…

Thanks for the info! This all seems good but it basically seems like what you'd expect from gig-work code reviewing. I'm mainly concerned about the pay and how it relates to experience, haven't been able to see any comments here showing what people actually made for N hours or work. That's always the catch with the gig-work type of jobs.

I did tutoring online a while ago which claimed a lot of the same benefits, but in actuality it was hard to get a good amount of work on the site to make it worth it. You'd have to be online for hours checking the tab and then hope a 30 min session will pop up. I'm guessing there won't be that same issue here but don't want to go through the process without a general ballpark of expected income, and people being evasive in this post is kinda concerning

Re: Code Review as a Service

#236

Post by joshgrib » Tue, Dec 28, 2021, 2:42 PM UTC

breakfastduck wrote: post #152

yjftsjthsd-h wrote: post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Let me try: This looks way too cheap to be able to afford good enough reviewers to be worth using; if someone is good enough to be able to pick up a new codebase and usefully review changes that quickly, they'd get a better paying job.

If you read the rest of this thread you'll see numerous reviewers from the site giving their 2 cents. Much preferable to just making assumptions. It's pretty clear that the people offering the service are doing it as a way of gaining extra income on the side rather than a main employment.

I've read a bunch of the reviews and they seem kinda sketchy - no one will say how much they actually make in an hour and it's a lot of general "no trust us it's good". I can't find anyone saying "I'm making X per hour reviewing Y", if they pay over $30/hr I'm interested but really for less.

The pricing on the site is also super confusing - it's $200 for one hour of reviewing, but $700 for a month? In a typical month at my job I'm doing way more than 3.5 hours of review and also doing a bunch of other stuff on the side. Then if the $700 rate is supposed to be ~120 hours then that's only $5.83/hr which isn't even minimum wage where I am. It is however on par with a lot of gig-work jobs, which makes this even more concerning.

If anyone can say what they made I think that would do a lot to quell all the people that don't trust this. I'm also sure some people must have had a bad experience on the site and I haven't seen that yet which is suspicious.

If anyone from the site happens to see this then I think you should add a breakdown of the percentage of pay going to the reviewers, or just some examples like "For C++ you can expect $40-30/hr, JS is $35-25/hr, etc"

Re: Code Review as a Service

#237

Post by joshgrib » Tue, Dec 28, 2021, 2:49 PM UTC

hunterb123 wrote: post #155

breakfastduck wrote: post #152

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you read the rest of this thread you'll see numerous reviewers from the site giving their 2 cents. Much preferable to just making assumptions. It's pretty clear that the people offering the service are doing it as a way of gaining extra income on the side rather than a main employment.

He's got a point. $50-3000 / week tells you nothing. They should tell you the avg $ per hour.

This is always the stat I want from gig-work jobs and never the one they want to show. For example Uber will often tout paying upwards of $25-30/hr, but the actual average is closer to $11/hr, which is below minimum wage in many places, doesn't include any benefits/sick days/etc, and also doesn't include expenses from car insurance/gas/maintenance.

I'd really appreciate if all companies were required to report some basics stats on pay - total employees, min/max, average, and mean would be great

Re: Code Review as a Service

#238

Post by joshgrib » Tue, Dec 28, 2021, 2:59 PM UTC

mgkimsal wrote: post #72

pelasaco wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Reviewers earn anywhere between $50 and over $3,000/week. They are operating just like a freelancing platform, right? How many hours is a "week" for them? 40 hours? > PullRequest’s payment rates are comparable to those of a senior-level engineer based in the US. Like include life and health insurance, paid vacation, profit-sharing, a generous signing bonus, and more?

Quit perpetuating the tying of these basic things to the standard employment model. Get 'employers' out of the business of managing access to health care for employees. Let people 'pay' for their own vacation. You can provide 'profit sharing' to non-employees. Give me $3k/week and let me manage this myself vs giving me $2.5k/week and telling me how awesome my 'health insurance' is. I want my access to health care imp…

I'd agree with the "pay your own vacation" thing as long as there is profit sharing to ensure people are still getting the income they deserve from the work they already put it to build the company.

But with healthcare, at least in the US, the big issue with pricing is within the healthcare system - not employers paying for it. It certainly doesn't help to have healthcare tied to employment but having people pay high prices themselves instead of a company paying it doesn't really solve an issue it just moves it somewhere else.

It seems like the most proven solution is to socialize medical costs more, but that seems like a long-shot if we continue to insist that healthcare has to be profitable in the short-term. It's like saying "no we won't build this road because we can't charge the drivers tomorrow to make a profit on it", totally overlooking that it's an infrastructure investment and not a purchase