[ge96]

bitbucket is worse, reviewees can resolve reviewer's comments (github has this too turns out), after file changes, comments disappear

[AlotOfReading]

What's wrong with reviewees marking comments resolved? That allows anyone reading to see what issues are "open" or already addressed at a glance.

Code review isn't adversarial, so it's not like the reviewee is closing comments to shove bad code through and they need approvals anyway.

[DoctorDabadedoo]

Not bad if you have a junior that knows they are a junior, bad otherwise.

My pet peeve with bitbucket was that when doing code review, you couldn't send all comments and overall review in a batch, every single comment was received in real time by the author. Sometimes I would be still reviewing code when the author pushed fixes to comments I've made before and that still might need other changes. After 15 years they improved that 2 weeks ago. I'm glad it's better, but I hate it with a burning passion.

[ge96]

It's when they resolve it without verifying if their solution was good

[lmm]

Bitbucket is much better IME. It has a better handle on the current state of the review rather than offering you the whole diff to re-review whenever someone rebases, and it loses comments much less than github (indeed not at all, in my experience).