Hmmm...

Although I'm not as quick as you to write of pairs programming, I can see the benefits to this.

However, a process is only as good as the people who are using it. And making sure people use this accurately and consistently would be the challenge, as always.

Part of what makes the process work is that everyone is working closely on the same code and reading each other's feedback, so if someone is giving poor feedback or not giving enough feedback, everyone notices.

The one problem we did run into was engineers who were too busy to do reviews or sat on them for too long, and in that case, it's important to make sure the engineering lead is managing the process, and can reassign the reviews to other people with more time and/or get the engineer in question to make the reviews a priority.

I like it. I never heard of that software before, but it sounds really useful. We never really had a checkin review procedure, which I think was pretty silly on our part, but this sounds like it might actually help people improve as a side benefit to the review process.

Its also a technological solution, which sits well with me :)

Guido van Rossum, of Python fame and working for Google, developed a code review tool for Google named Mondrian. It is now open source and available as Rietveld at http://code.google.com/p/rietveld/
Useful for those using Subversion.