Code Reviews are common in software development. One programmer reviews another’s code to find potential issues or to see if the developer could have used something that the system already provided.
With multiple programmers, you can probably expect a versioning system, perhaps a centralized versioning system like SVN or Perforce. With that system, each programmer would make his/her changes and then would check in his/her changes into the repository. From there, the programmer’s peers would review the code.
What’s the problem with this system? The code is already checked in. The pressure is on the peers to ensure that the code is good, and it’s likely that this could slip through the cracks. I mean, those peers are working on getting 10 features complete themselves.
Well, I would argue that Git has a strong code review process built right in. This is due to the process of how distributed version control works.