Bitbucket Reviews

We use Bitbucket to store all of our code repositories. It has become the standardized tool for code management across all teams.

The platform integrates with other tools, such as Jenkins, enabling automated workflows for building, testing, and deploying code changes. It triggers the pipeline process, ensuring that builds are generated and deployments are managed efficiently.

The product could be less expensive for small companies.

We have been using Bitbucket for five years.

The product is stable. Being utilized by a multinational company like ours, stability is crucial, and it has consistently delivered on this front. Over the past five years of usage, we have encountered no significant defects or bugs.

We have around 1000 Bitbucket users in our company. On a wider scale, across India, where we have 22,000 employees, Bitbucket adoption is also significant.

The initial setup for Bitbucket was straightforward. The process was similar to deploying GitHub and GitLab, based on Git technology. We have various tools available, such as SourceTree or Visual Studio Code, which can seamlessly integrate with the product. I prefer using Git Bash for command-line operations. However, many others in our team utilize Visual Studio Code, which provides a user-friendly interface for running commands.

In a small-scale company where I previously worked, cost-saving measures led to a transition from GitLab's dedicated servers to GitHub's cloud-based solution. This switch resulted in significant cost savings and demonstrated the impact of cloud technology adoption on budget management. However, my current organization, a larger enterprise with a substantial budget, focuses on reliability and functionality rather than cost alone. Therefore, while Bitbucket may be perceived as costly for smaller companies, larger enterprises like mine prioritize tools like ServiceNow despite their expenses.

While alternatives like GitLab and GitHub were available, our organization remained steadfast in its preference for Bitbucket. Additionally, our team members, particularly those involved in DevOps, CI/CD, and system maintenance, were highly experienced with Bitbucket. Given the critical nature of our work in the banking and insurance sectors, where clients worldwide depend on our products, there was a reluctance to experiment with alternative solutions.

Learning to use Bitbucket, especially for beginners, is quite easy. In my experience spanning over twelve years in the field, most companies rely on Git for version control, and Bitbucket is just one of the platforms built on Git technology. The commands and client tools are the same: Bitbucket, GitHub, or GitLab. This uniformity makes it straightforward for beginners to adopt and use Bitbucket or any Git-based tool without facing significant challenges.

I recommend Bitbucket for version control features. It is a good tool suitable for long-term use. It's straightforward to adapt to, with user-friendly features and a convenient UI. 

I rate it an eight out of ten.

We use Bitbucket for code management.

The product's most valuable feature is output backup.

There could be more AI features included in the product.

We have been using Bitbucket for two years.

I rate Bitbucket's stability a ten out of ten.

We have 100 Bitbucket users. It is a scalable platform.

The initial setup process is easy. It involves linking a desktop and deploying the code into Bitbucket. It takes a few minutes to complete.

We implemented the product with the help of our in-house team.

Bitbucket is an inexpensive product.

I rate Bitbucket a ten out of ten. I advise others to experiment with integrating the product with other vendors for deployment.

We have a Bitbucket server internally, that we manage with our own IT team. We use the solution as a software control repository.

Bitbucket could improve search and indexing capabilities. There is only basic searching available. There is only the ability to index the main branch but not the subbranches. The search capabilities are dodgy.

In a future release, the way they manage the permission of the records in the solution could be better. They fit well if you're only running one or two projects. If you have a lot of projects and records, the current permission model is not flexible. You have a challenge if you want to provide permissions across all the projects to be the same. Additionally, if you want to have specific permission there are limitations. There requires a lot of redundant work to accomplish what we want.

I have been using Bitbucket for approximately six years.

Bitbucket has some initial stability issues because of our large team using the solution. However, this was later resolved.

I rate the stability of Bitbucket an eight out of ten.

We have approximately 300 to 400 users using this solution. Our whole organization uses it.

I rate the scalability of Bitbucket an eight out of ten.

I have not used the support from Bitbucket. However, my team has used the support. The support has been fine, they have not had any downtime.

I have used GitHub and it has more features than Bitbucket. Additionally, I have used GitLab.

GitHub is a more mature solution compared to Bitbucket. The search capability has improved in GitHub since they are integrated with Opensoft. You can create your workflow and actions and it becomes easier to do things. GitHub can help a lot. The only season why our organization didn't adopt it is because of the high pricing.

The initial setup of Bitbucket is straightforward. 

The initial setup was in-house. However, it is possible they had some assistance.

Bitbucket is a cost-effective solution. It is the cheapest in the market. It is lower than GitLab and GitHub.

For general company usage, Bitbucket should fit the purpose. If you have a larger team you better look for other options. For a more complete solution for your CICD, I would recommend GitHub.

I rate Bitbucket a seven out of ten.

Our company uses the solution for code management. 

It is easy to write code and store it in the central repository. 

Fine tuning for procedures and features related to analytics and code validation is needed. 

There are some issues in obtaining licenses.

I have been using the solution for two years. 

The solution is stable so I rate it a nine out of ten. 

The dynamic solution is definitely scalable and customizable to any need. 

Technical support is pretty helpful so I rate them an eight out of ten. 

Positive

The setup is simple with no issues. 

We implemented the solution in-house. 

Sometimes there are issues in obtaining licenses and the pricing could be improved.

I rate pricing a six out of ten. 

We did not evaluate other options. 

I rate the solution an eight out of ten. 

We use Bitbucket as a repository for our sensitive data, like source code and any other sensitive information that requires change and version tracking. We have eight to 10 users currently accessing Bitbucket.

Bitbucket is a standard source code repository with all the features you would expect. It supports Git and SVN. It's an extensive tool that provides us with merging, branching, and change management capabilities. You can compare the changes with the current and previous versions.

We have been using Bitbucket for four or five years.

Bitbucket is highly stable.

You can scale Bitbucket vertically or horizontally.

I rate Bitbucket support eight out of 10.

Positive

We used Team Foundation Server and Microsoft SourceSafe.

Bitbucket's Initial setup is a little complicated because you need to install  and configure the solution. It can take one or two days to deploy Bitbucket. If you have a high workload, you can deploy it on multiple server farms as needed.

The vendor is maintaining Bitbucket. We have one staff member responsible for the configuration, but we consult the vendor for patching and upgrades.

I rate BitBucket eight out of 10. Bitbucket is an excellent product. Atlassian will move to the cloud, so the on-prem version may be phased out. You have to be careful when choosing this product. There will be a cloud version available, so it's better if you go with the cloud version of Bitbucket.

Bitbucket's best feature is a Git client called SourceTree, which allows you to seamlessly integrate on-premise with on-cloud and mix and match repositories on your own server.

I've been using Bitbucket for four or five years.

Bitbucket's stability isn't flawless. It has crashed on me occasionally, but I haven't yet lost anything after a crash. I believe the client is written in C or C++ and should possibly be subject to a more rigorous testing procedure.

The initial setup is very simple - you use the web interface to create a repository, then receive a link and use it in your SourceTree client, and then you're connected. This is why I prefer Bitbucket to GitLab, because it's totally integrated and works with Jira, so everything is inside the same realm.

Bitbucket lets me create new projects in a few clicks and check out files in a seamless and integrated manner. It's also great for Linux users, including SourceTree running on Ubuntu, and for organizations that use Jira heavily. I would rate Bitbucket as eight out of ten.

We use the solution for source control.

The planning model is good, and so is the suite of applications around it. Bitbucket makes it easy to manage ops, integration, and unified login.

Bitbucket should come with code review pre-integrated, which would be better than integrating another tool into the solution.

The organization I'm working with has worked with the solution for about six months.

I rate Bitbucket's stability an eight out of ten for our use, keeping in mind we just use it for source control.

We have 20 users on Bitbucket. I have seen Bitbucket expand to hundreds of developers across multiple teams, and I didn't find any issues then.

My IT team has contacted customer support for Jira, probably to enable SS4. I didn't hear any complaints from the IT team that the resources were slow. They were able to resolve the issue pretty fast.

The initial setup is straightforward.

We managed the installation and configuration in-house.

I rate Bitbucket's pricing a five out of ten.

Comparing Bitbucket with GitLab, I would have chosen GitLab earlier because of its pricing model, though their new model has gotten a little expensive. Likewise, GitLab is better feature-wise.

If the organization has adopted Atlassian, I will choose BitBucket. Still, if somebody has chosen Visual Studio Online or Azure DevOps as their product management tool for their development activities, GitHub would be a better option.

Most providers provide scalable solutions, so that has not been something I've been concerned about. I'll know how to deal with it if I ever hit a hard limit. Likewise, hosting is not a big challenge. What concerns me is the service's features, whether it's BitBucket or GitHub. Similarly, I would be more concerned with creating the build pipeline, how well it's engineered, and supporting other platforms. For example, having the Mac OS or the iOS build tools available. A building environment is what I look for. And as long as the core repositories are working, scalability is my last concern.

When choosing a service, it's not just about the service alone but what the organization has adopted because that greatly determines what we choose. Otherwise, we would be competing with what the market provides in the future. 90% of future challenges would be because we poorly chose a tool.

I rate Bitbucket a six out of ten.

The solution is used for web-development

The solution is good for cloud collaborative work. During the time I was working as a release manager, I could manage the tool request and the technical problems that occurred on the site of the development.

We can watch the newly implemented code. So it's quite nice to organize the teams to see what part of the work is done and what part of the code is already old or new. It is very good for that kind of management.

The scalability for the cloud version can be improved.

I have been using the solution for nine months.

It is a stable solution.

It is a scalable solution. The cloud version is not scalable. But if you pay for the premium version it is very scalable. Five users are using the solution at a time.

I have only taken demos for products before and did not use anything. It was mainly the license solution. I was searching in several websites, and all of them were talking good things about the Atlassian solution. So I decided to give it a try.

The initial setup was easy and quick.

I deployed the solution myself.

I did not pay for the license as I was using a corporate license. But I think the pricing is fair.

It's very easy to use and a nice tool to manage. And I think the first implementation or the configuration is very important so that teams could work with that.

I rate it nine out of ten.