Well, in the places where I've seen it done right, the code reviews happen before the code is committed. Do you mean before the code is merged? Either programm

Well, in the places where I've seen it done right, the code reviews happen before the code is committed. Do you mean before the code is merged? Either programmers at these places worked directly together (eg. pairing), or they weren't using a DVCS like Git or HG. We use GitHub at work, with code-reviewed Pull Requests. You do you work (pairing as you want), then ask for it to be merged. It gets reviewed by at least one peer, and you get feedback, discuss and make changes, and then merge those into trunk. You get the benefit of code review, while also being allowed to carry on with something else in the same codebase without sitting on your butt waiting for a code review. (Has anyone else tried this and had good or bad results?)