We performed a comparison between Bitbucket Server and GitHub based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Version Control solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."The product is easy to maintain."
"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."
"Our code is secure."
"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."
"The tool makes pushing codes and setting up CI/CD pipelines easy."
"Bitbucket Server integrates well with other products."
"I believe it's user-friendly for our developers, and it's effective in terms of traceability for tracking our actions."
"The most valuable feature of the Bitbucket Server is its ease of management. The solution is easy to manage once we migrate and set up the data. The solution offers a fast code push feature."
"This product is very good for storing and versioning code."
"The control is the most valuable feature as developers can work on a single code."
"We can make a private repository."
"During our use of GitHub, we have not encountered any problems and GitHub adds new features frequently."
"The ease of use is valuable."
"I have found GitHub stable."
"The best feature is the ability to track the history of all code changes, and it's easy to use. Additionally, as it's open source, anyone can use that feature resulting in distributed development. This opens the door to collaboration with different code and developer, feature, and master branches of development."
"I find the most valuable collaboration between our peers to be a seamless collaboration between our peers. We can connect and change our code, allowing us to be agile in our projects. Since we're talking about DevOps, we're using Jenkins in our pipeline. It helps speed up the process by automating the DevOps workflow."
"Some of the capabilities that I am looking for from a command line are not really available."
"If I want to mail someone a master branch, then sometimes it shows some conflict with other codes in the master branch."
"Enhancing the real-time reflection of changes online is an area that could benefit from improvement."
"Instead of providing only raw features and plugins, Atlassian should provide a ready-to-use integration of both choices to incorporate "trunk-based" development."
"The product interface consists of multiple features that are complicated to navigate for new users."
"We opted for the on-premises solution, and while it's quite expensive, I believe there's room for improvement in terms of pricing."
"The product's initial setup phase is complex."
"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."
"In complex cases, we have to use the terminal for conflict resolution. If those conflicts could be resolved visually in the editor, that would be much better."
"The security for this solution could be tightened up and improved."
"GitHub could add some more security features."
"The development team pushes the code into a repository, and the CI/CD pipeline will perform the build. We need open-source libraries to perform the builds. It would be helpful to have the ability to link to open-source libraries like npm libraries. I don't know if GitHub Actions provides this. I would like to see that in GitHub Actions if they don't."
"The onboarding process could be simplified."
"GitHub's issue management could be improved a little from an organization standpoint. It would be helpful to have the ability to organize a work board or a backlog more comprehensively. For organizations migrating to GitHub from arbitrary systems, it's a little bit of a headache to move on to that system."
"The security point should be addressed in the next release and scaling is also an issue."
"The merging features can be improved."
Bitbucket Server is ranked 2nd in Version Control with 21 reviews while GitHub is ranked 3rd in Version Control with 74 reviews. Bitbucket Server is rated 8.2, while GitHub is rated 8.6. The top reviewer of Bitbucket Server writes "An easy to use solution that works as a code repository for developers and helps them merge changes ". On the other hand, the top reviewer of GitHub writes "Beneficial version control and continuous integration, but guides would be helpful". Bitbucket Server is most compared with Bitbucket, Atlassian SourceTree and AWS CodeCommit, whereas GitHub is most compared with Snyk, AWS CodeCommit, Fortify on Demand, Bitbucket and Contrast Security Assess. See our Bitbucket Server vs. GitHub report.
See our list of best Version Control vendors.
We monitor all Version Control reviews to prevent fraudulent reviews and keep review quality high. We do not post reviews by company employees or direct competitors. We validate each review for authenticity via cross-reference with LinkedIn, and personal follow-up with the reviewer when necessary.
