Bitbucket Server Reviews

I use the solution in my company for traditional projects. Now, my company plans to move our projects to GitLab since it provides a single UI for everything.

Bitbucket Server creates a branch and is useful for authentication, commits, and pushing changes.

Bitbucket Server is a standalone tool or server. My company also uses Jira. In our company, there are different kinds of tools linked together by webhooks, and we use Jenkins to run Bitbucket Server. GitLab provides an integrated solution, so everything is available in a single product. With Bitbucket Server, you can see the codes, configure the pipelines, and you can merge a pull request. Bitbucket Server may be even better than GitHub. With GitLab, you have a single solution in one place, so it is not scattered in many places, like in the case of Jira, Jenkins, or Bitbucket Server, making it a better option for our company. From an improvement perspective, Bitbucket Server should make everything available as a single solution.

I have experience with Bitbucket Server.

In our company, Bitbucket Server has a backend link to Jira. When Jira is down, Bitbucket Server is also down.

It is an okay tool in terms of scalability. Though I am unsure, I feel that Oracle DB is used in the backend. In our company, when we have to create new reports in the backend database, you just increase the hard disk. Another team in my company controls the aforementioned area associated with the product, so I don't know it in detail.

Considering that all the developers in my company use the product, I would say that around 30 percent of the people in my company use the solution.

My company decided that since Zscaler is on the cloud, we need a local on-premises server.

The product's initial setup phase is complex. GitLab is better to deal with when it comes to the setup phase since it uses the YAML script. With GitLab, one can use templates for almost all projects, so a given project can be dealt with based on the templates, and sometimes the templates might have to be updated a little bit. In Jenkins, every project is treated separately, so you have to create every project on Jenkinsfile. It cannot be based on some templates, and I feel it may be a little bit complex and not as easy as GitLab.

One needs to pay towards the licensing charges associated with the product.

I am planning to move to GitLab.

In terms of the most valuable feature of the tool for our company's current collaboration, I would say that since the product is deployed on an on-premises model, you can easily control the branching strategy, merge strategies, and code review.

The pull request feature of the tool streamlines the code review process in our company, after which we invite some people to review it and then change the policies if needed. All people involved in the process of reviewing should provide approval based on which the company can delete or merge branches.

For the improvement of CI/CD pipelines, my company uses Jenkins to check the pipelines from the Bitbucket Server. In the pipeline, our company can link to Jira or Confluence and deal with checkout, clone, compile, and then do the test and generate reports.

I recommend the product to others, especially small companies because you can get a cloud solution for your organization, and also, it is similar to GitLab and GitHub. One can work with Bitbucket Server, Jira, and GitLab, along with CI/CD pipelines. Small companies also need not set up on-premises servers and should prefer cloud services.

In terms of benefits, I feel that many companies are moving to Bitbucket Server since it can be deployed on an on-premises model at a time when everything is being moved to the cloud. GitLab can be used by those who want to move to the cloud.

I rate the tool an eight out of ten.

It would have been better to use Bitbucket Server if it had something similar to the concept called GitHub Actions since it allows GitHub to provide seamless integration of CI/CD pipelines.

I have experience with Bitbucket Server. I am a customer of the product.

It is a stable solution

It is an easily scalable solution.

I don't have experience with the solution's technical support. I rate the technical support a seven to eight out of ten.

Neutral

I have experience with GitHub and GitLab. Compared to GitHub and GitLab, Bitbucket Server provides better security levels of verification. Bitbucket Server's pricing options are cheaper than GitHub and GitLab. In general, GitHub is much better than Bitbucket Server. Bitbucket Server's prices are cheaper than GitHub.

The product's initial setup phase was neither a difficult nor easy process, making it a moderate process. GitHub is much easier from a deployment perspective, especially from the CI/CD angle for continuous integrations and deployments. Security-wise, Bitbucket Server offers some additional steps allowing you to use a secured authentication process, like single sign-on, authenticated sign-on, or additional two-factor verification, which is better in Bitbucket Server compared to GitHub.

Bitbucket Server enhances collaboration in our company's development workflow since its users are developers who use CodeCommit. Areas like release planning and code movement from development to integration to testing and from production to deployment are managed with Bitbucket Server. Most of the code repositories are also on Bitbucket Server.

The features of Bitbucket Server that I found most beneficial for source code management stem from its integration capabilities with code repositories that are supposed to be from different branches. Basically, integration is easier in Bitbucket Server. Deployment is also pretty seamless across from Bitbucket Server's side. Fetching the code from the repo branch and deploying it is easy.

Bitbucket Server's pull request feature impacted our company's code review process since any kind of difference in the code could be analyzed more easily. The branches could be analyzed better, while the CI/CD integration is also pretty easy with Bitbucket Server. The tool shows you the whole branch of how the code is being used. The data lineage is pretty seamless.

There is a separate team in my company that takes care of the maintenance part of the product.

The integration of Bitbucket Server with other Atlassian products improves our company's project management since we get to know the status once we commit the code as the CodeCommit status is usually reflected in Jira, and it is easily observable allowing users to see what changes have happened. Users can get a unified view of each task or each project, along with details on what code is associated with which step and how Jira commits across. The tool provides a single unified view for code management and project planning.

Bitbucket Server's permission management helped maintain the security of our company's code base, as it is an area that has to do more with the authentication and authorization levels.

I rate the tool a seven out of ten.

Bitbucket Server serves as our source code management and version control platform. Like Azure Repository, we utilize it to store and manage our source code. The integration of Bitbucket into our Software Development Life Cycle process is crucial. However, it's important to note that the product does not provide code approval functionalities. We may need to employ additional tools, such as Jenkins, for code approvals. Additional tools from Jira and Jenkins help in the CI/CD process. 

Bitbucket Server supports code collaboration by providing commands developers can use to check in code. Through comments, developers can specify the purpose of the code check-in. Additionally, Bitbucket allows tagging of code for releases.

Bitbucket Server can experience performance issues when pushing a large amount of code. This process may take a considerable amount of time.

I have been using the product for three to four years. 

The product is generally stable, with occasional hiccups or errors that might occur.

The solution can be scaled vertically or horizontally as per the requirement. My company has eight to ten users. 

The tool's support is standard. They respond as soon as possible. 

The tool's deployment requires expertise since its environment is on-premise. To deploy Bitbucket Server, you must run the standalone executable file and set up the database server since it stores metadata in the database. Additionally, you'll require a shared folder to keep the actual code. Configuration of URLs and a server proxy are necessary for the deployment process. There are one to two engineers who manage the tool. 

The solution's deployment requires a consultant. 

The tool's licensing costs are yearly. Prices can become expensive if you have a lot of users. 

The product is good, but its features are limited. It is a good choice if the requirement is solely to manage source code. It handles source code management, providing stable check-in and check-out functionality and features like comments and tagging. You can set permissions at the project level, repository level, or branch level. Project-level permissions apply to all branches and repositories within the project. Repository-level permissions are specific to the branches within that repository. I rate it a seven out of ten. 

The solution can easily integrate with Jira and other Atlassian products. 

When working on code development or maintenance, the initial step involves pushing the code to a central server, to manage code changes and additions. Bitbucket Server is commonly used for pushing and pulling code and plays a pivotal role in this process.

Its standout features are the seamless integration with various intelligent tools and its user-friendly nature.

There are instances when I interact with Bitbucket and encounter a situation where I've pushed changes to the website server. However, when I access my branch on the website server, I notice that the changes are not immediately reflected. Enhancing the real-time reflection of changes online is an area that could benefit from improvement.

I have been working with it for one year.

It offers good stability capabilities.

It demonstrates high scalability, which is essential for my company's substantial workforce, consisting of approximately eight to nine thousand employees. Within my team, we rely on it as our version control system, and nearly two hundred team members actively use it.

In the rare event that we faced downtime, the admin and other teams promptly addressed and resolved the issue.

Neutral

Before we switched to Bitbucket, the company was working with GitHub on the server. Bitbucket is known for its user-friendliness, and personally, I find it very easy to work with.

The initial setup is quite easy.

I would recommend it as it serves as an excellent platform for code maintenance. I would rate it eight out of ten.

We mainly use Bitbucket Server for CI/CD. We had around two to three members working on the same project for automation. To manage version control, we used Bitbucket to collaborate and integrate with other resources. 

We created separate repositories for each endpoint, including API endpoints and different applications. We also set up separate pipelines for each of them. The customer had a specific requirement, so we created the necessary repositories and hosted the configuration server.

Earlier, we configured triggers and hooks on the Bitbucket Server. This setup allowed automated triggering whenever someone pushed code to a branch. Depending on the trigger, the pipeline would run on BuildKite or another CI/CD tool.

The most valuable feature is that it has its own pipelines.

The UI could be enhanced.

I have been using Bitbucket Server for around two and a half years.

We never had any downtime, performance issues with the Bitbucket Server.

10-12 members are using the Bitbucket Server.

Initially, we started using Bitbucket Server about a year ago, primarily for managing our build processes with the build guide. Since then, we have increasingly adopted Python. Initially, we had only two repositories, but now we have expanded to twelve to thirteen repositories.

Bitbucket has a lot of features compared to GitHub.

The initial setup is straightforward.

If you're going to use a version control system, Bitbucket Server is a good choice.

Overall, I rate the solution a nine out of ten.

I lead a testing team for a company, and all my QAs use Bitbucket Server to store their automation testing code.

Bitbucket Server easily integrates with Jira because they are both Atlassian products. The solution's integration with Jenkins is also easy.

The solution's user interface could be improved because it's not very user-friendly or intuitive. It feels like old HTML blocks were used to build the user interface.

Some supporting documentation for Bitbucket Server would be helpful because it's not very easy to get information about it. I remember having to Google a few times to figure out how to do something on Bitbucket Server.

I have been using Bitbucket Server for two years.

I haven’t faced any issues with the solution’s stability.

I rate Bitbucket Server ten out of ten for stability.

We've been only using the solution as a repository, and we haven't faced any challenges with its scalability.

I rate Bitbucket Server a six out of ten for scalability.

The solution's technical support is not good. They pick keywords from the customer's email and send some automated standard responses that have been copypasted, which doesn't help.

Negative

Bitbucket Server is quite expensive compared to other products. We pay a monthly licensing fee for the solution.

I am open to exploring other products because while Bitbucket Server does the job, there are better tools in the market that I need to explore.

Overall, I rate Bitbucket Server a five out of ten.

Bitbucket Server I use for a software repository that has code inside.

Bitbucket Server is easy to use. You can use other applications to access it, or you can use it to access the internet. You can use solutions, such as Sourcetree, which is free, and put it on your development system and use it to do the check-in, checkouts, and those type of operations. It is nice, but some other developers may agree.

I have been Bitbucket Server for approximately two and a half years.

Bitbucket Server is stable.

Bitbucket Server is scalable because the developers are putting things in it they're not supposed to, such as binary data, and it's more or less a text code repository.

We have approximately 150 user licenses. Sometimes vendors will have licenses in chunks. For example, from 50 to 150 or 200. There's no in-between, sometimes you have to buy more licenses than you need.

I have not needed to use technical support. I am good with using this solution and can figure out problems myself or I can use the internet and find a solution.

The initial setup is straightforward.

I can do the integration and setup of the solution. There requires one person to do the maintenance of the solution. The solution is low maintenance. If a patch comes out, and it affects you then you need to do something. If it does not, then you do not need to do anything.

There is a cost to use this solution but it is based on how many users are using it. If you have 50 users or 1,000 users the price will be very different.

Bitbucket Server can be expensive and they want you to purchase their cloud solution. They are getting rid of their on-premises solution, however, you can still find them.

Atlassian tools seem to use Log4j quite a bit, and they should get away from it because of the recent security issues that have happened in the last few days.

I rate Bitbucket Server a six out of ten.

I do a lot of data acquisitions. I establish several contacts and get accounts generated on our clusters so that our researchers can process the data.

We use Bitbucket to get flows for our pipeline management. We outline the scripts that we write to keep them in there for version control.

The most valuable feature of this solution is server management. 

There are other solutions that do that, but this is a solution that the global IT department has available for everyone across the organization.

It would be useful if we were able to work and manage other tickets; for example, if I were to use Jira, Confluence, or Bitbucket, all from a command-line standpoint, in addition to the web interface, it would be incredibly helpful.

I know that there are tools, packages, and different plugins that I can use to collaborate from a command-line standpoint, or through other tools, but putting the functionality into a new version would definitely help.

Some of the capabilities that I am looking for from a command line are not really available.

I have been using this solution for three, four, maybe five years.

We use a few different versions, but they are all older.

It's a stable solution, but there are times where it's indexing, and if it happens during the time that I am using it, then it's not very stable. We have been using it for years, so there is a lot of data.

It's scalable. The newer cloud versions of the tools may or may not alleviate the issues with stability, which is a problem with the version that I have.

I have not contacted technical support.

They have a community. If anybody has a question they will be willing to help and blog posts.

Anybody can look at to learn more about their products and how to use the different solutions that they have.

A lot of what they have is for the new versions, which are cloud-based. For example, they are actively working on different plugins.

We use Amazon and Google Cloud storage solutions. Also, AWS buckets, GCP buckets, and Kubernetes, but it depends on what's in the contract and available for the researcher, for both internal and external applications.

I was not a part of the initial setup.

I am not familiar with how it is set up. It was done through our global team and made available for the company.

I am not aware of the pricing.

If anybody was considering this tool, I would be expecting that they would really evaluate it and know what the functionalities are ahead of time.

There are other tools that are similar, so make sure to look at everything available in that space and make sure it fits their needs.

I would rate Bitbuck Server an eight out of ten.