Bitbucket Server Reviews

In my company, we use Bitbucket Server for managing the repositories since we tend to have different repositories for a particular project, like a back-end, front-end, and the UI, while sometimes everything remains the same.

An organization has to have a repository either way, and it is better to go with Bitbucket Server since it is one of the main tools everybody uses in the market to manage their repositories.

The solution's most valuable feature is that it is simpler in terms of code changes since you just have to map it to a sourcetree and commit changes, after which the user can go for check-in and check-out. Bitbucket Server's version control is amazing.

We had issues in terms of logs, URLs, and cloning the repositories, which is the same issue we keep facing in our company though we manage to resolve it each time. The aforementioned problems make the solution a bit tricky, so it would be great if Bitbucket could provide users with a smoother approach or process when they face an issue. At the moment, there are not many details on how to proceed with the troubleshooting if one of the users faces an issue with the product.

I have been using Bitbucket Server for four years. I use the solution's latest version.

It is an amazingly stable solution.

I won't be able to comment on the product's scalability since it is a repository used in our company. I am unsure of how to scale up Bitbucket Server in my company, and I know that the repository has nothing to do with this storage space in the product. Our company has not encountered use cases where we need to scale up the repository.

The architect developers, consisting of around eight to nine members in our company, use the solution since they have access to it.

In our company, we contacted the technical support team when there was a need to know the endpoints, where you have to configure it properly and authenticate it. We had faced some cloning and access issues, and as of now, these issues have been sorted out.

Bitbucket Server's technical support team was good. In our company, we also have different technical support teams specifically dedicated to each of the products we use.

The initial setup of the tool was very easy.

The solution is deployed on the cloud.

My team does not manage the maintenance and deployments of the solution. For maintenance and deployments, we speak with Jira team. For each of the products that we use in our organization, we have a separate team to manage a particular product. There is a separate team to manage products that fall under Microsoft Office, while another team manages AWS products used in our company. We have to reach out to Jira and raise a ticket to let them know the products we need from their catalog before coming up with the list of what we want and submitting it to Jira, which then provides the licenses for each user.

My suggestion to those planning to buy the solution is to use the product to its full extent since it is a strong and stable product.

I rate the overall product an eight 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 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.

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.

I use Bitbucket Server to store code. 

The tool makes pushing codes and setting up CI/CD pipelines easy. 

Bitbucket Server has limited user support for its free version. It is expensive. 

I have been using the product for two years. 

I rate the tool's stability a nine out of ten. 

Bitbucket Server is scalable. 

I have worked with GitHub and GitLab. 

The tool's deployment is straightforward. 

Bitbucket Server's deployment can be done in-house. 

Bitbucket Server saves a lot of money. 

I rate Bitbucket Server a nine out of ten. 

We have this solution integrated into our CI/CD ecosystem along with Jenkins, Bamboo, and JIRA.

Bitbucket is just a tool. The important part is knowing how to evolve towards a "trunk-based" development model, which implies all SW development must always be "testable/ready for PROD deployment". This implies integrating/automating using many tools.

The Pull Request GUI is good. Integration of Bitbucket with JIRA & Bamboo is well done by Atlassian.

Implementing DevOps CI/CD is easy to implement after a "trunk-based" development model is adopted.

Instead of providing only raw features and plugins, Atlassian should provide a ready-to-use integration of both choices to incorporate "trunk-based" development. For example:

• JIRA / Bitbucket / Bamboo 

or

• JIRA / Bitbucket / CloudBees-Jenkins

Four years.

Atlassian support is very good.

Horizontal scalability & high availability are the most important features that we are looking forward to from the Stash DC. With respect to the premier support, timely response and the fact that we have assigned representatives is great.

The premier support has helped Cisco in mitigating risk and reducing cost.

Will let you know in a couple months. Still in the process of evaluating the product.

We use Stash Data Center and Premier Support. We have been using it since January 12, 2015.

None, so far.

Testing under progress.

In production, we still have the single instance of the product and it has scaled pretty well and no major issues reported thus far.

Very good but I have some feedback with respect to the support.

1) Currently, we have a limitation of 3 resources for interacting with Atlassian support. It would be nice to increase it to 5-10 because we have to internally depend upon identified users to communicate to the Atlassian. Or else, have this support aligned to the Cisco mailer alias so that multiple users within Cisco will be notified and can use the same user name to raise support requests with Atlassian.

Very good but would be good to have a user interface in Atlassian.com to manage the users at our end instead of having to communicate each time to the premier support to manage users.

We are still using SVN but we moving toward git because of the flexibility it provides.

Nope, our engineering wing had done some analysis and they suggested Stash. Hence, we directly jumped in.

If folks out there are looking to move to a more agile approach for development, Agile Jira + Bamboo + Stash DC will definitely be a great way to go since these systems seamlessly integrate with each other. Premier support is definitely recommended.

It shows any contact records at the backend. But, if we face any config guard, any filing data, or any formatting error, then we can easily monitor in the Bitbucket pipeline itself. If a specific branch of code has an error, we have to look into that particular branch instead of looking into the overall code, and overall backup.

If I want to mail someone a master branch, then sometimes it shows some conflict with other codes in the master branch.

When we clear that master branch, clear those lines, resolve them, and try to push again, it shows the conflict error. It's some kind of server issue or it's some kind of different particular brand issue. When we try to push the specified code, instead of that, sometimes it automatically saves all local files, which are available in the particular branch. 

Then we get a server issue. When we are faced with this problem, we need to remove that particular branch, and we once again, create the new branch, and once again, pull the changes around.

I have been using Bitbucket Server for two years. 

The solution is easily scalable.

The initial setup is straightforward. It takes half an hour to deploy. 

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