AWS CodeCommit Reviews

I use this for pretty much everything. I work with Glue, pipelines, CodeCommit, and CoPipeline. I use Kinesis and Kafka.

Not really that much stands out. I am using CodeCommit since my customer asked me to use it. It is just an appliance, and GitHub and GitLab can do a better job.

There's a very limited aspect to the solution. When I compare code, AWS has a cap on the file size, and that size is pretty small compared to what GitHub and GitLab provide.

I have been using this solution for at least five years, at a minimum.

I see there is not much of an issue except its limitation in terms of reading file size and all that stuff, like doing a difference between two files that are over a certain amount of size.

There is no need to scale up. It is just a repository. AWS essentially has all my source code in there, and I take and deploy.

The customer service is pretty good. They do a good job, however, it is like anything else. Not having full contacts makes it difficult, and there is so much to do.

Neutral

The setup is straightforward.

Implementation involves a team of people, like DevOps-type folks. The process is kind of a handoff. There is AWS code developed by a developer and committed into CodeCommit. Then there is a build process, which is done via the pipeline with the deployment. This is managed by the DevSecOps people.

It is expensive now. When I started, the cost was affordable for many people, like small businesses. Now, I have small businesses moving off the cloud since it is expensive.

GitHub and GitLab can do a better job.

I would rate the solution probably six out of ten. 

I am an architect, developer, and DevOps guy, so I do the work for the client and customers. It is off the cuff right now. It is on the cloud, but CodeCommit, as I mentioned, is now being retired by AWS. 

They do not allow any new customers to use it. They will allow existing ones, but it is a matter of time to migrate to GitHub and GitLab. AWS is going to probably phase it out next year or so. 

I mainly use CodeCommit to commit my code and push it to the repository. Whenever I develop code in the local environment, I use CodeCommit to check in and put the code onto the remote repository and trigger the pipeline.

The solution scalable. I can meet the repository size and traffic requirements without any additional configuration. AWS integrates well with other AWS services, like native integration tools such as CodePipeline, CodeBuild, and CodeDeploy. 

It also works well with CloudWatch for monitoring and CloudTrail for auditing. I can use IAM to enable detailed permission at the repository level. It supports Git tools and their workflows. These are some of the features that are quite useful when using CodeCommit.

There is room for improvement in Insight Analytics. A built-in dashboard with advanced analytics, like commit frequencies and pull request trends, could be added. These features would help gain deeper insights for project management. Integration with third-party tools, such as external DevOps and project management tools, is limited compared to competitors. Integration with popular tools like Jira, Jenkins, and GitHub Actions can be streamlined.

I have used the solution for four years.

There are no stability issues because it's self-managed by Amazon. I haven't found any glitches in the performance stability-wise.

The solution is quite scalable. There are no technical issues or problems concerning scalability.

Quite a few times, I have raised support tickets with Amazon and collaborated with their customer support for technical support to fix issues in our project developments. This could be at the architect level or the infrastructure coding level. 

At various stages, I have collaborated with them. They are quite responsive yet have strict protocols, which involve following up at regular intervals. I don't find any delays on their end.

Positive

It's quite easy to set up. It's not a big deal to configure.

The solution provides a timely response. There isn't much delay in response time.

Lately, it is turning out to be a little expensive. The market is preferring Azure because it offers resources at a much cheaper price. Compared to Azure, AWS is more expensive, and that's the trend.

Quality-wise, it's good. It's at the same level as Azure.

It depends on how the entire project is set up within AWS. I would suggest using cloud-native tools, like CodeCommit, CodePipeline, and CodeDeploy, for better integration and seamless delivery of code into production. 

I would rate the product eight out of ten.