GitHub Reviews

The product can be used to set up simple pipelines. GitHub is owned by Microsoft and is deployed on Azure. If you work offline with Azure, it is very easy to link to GitHub because Azure's cloud engineering is designed to handle a lot of use cases.

Though I haven't done much research, GitHub lacks in providing more functions like GitLab. GitHub should aim to provide more functionalities.

I have been using GitHub for many years.

Stability-wise, I rate the solution a seven out of ten.

The product is becoming more and more complex if I consider how it was in the past. If you search the tool's menu, sometimes the terms are used by clouds like AWS and Azure. AWS has a set of words and terms, while Azure also has a similar set of words. The meaning of the words in Azure is not as straightforward as it is in AWS. GitHub has a lot of new terms, menus, and functions, which are sometimes not very straightforward to understand.

The product's scalability should be fine since Microsoft mostly supports it, and I believe that it is available on the cloud services offered under Azure.

I tried to use Atlassian's cloud services, but eventually, I chose GitHub, considering its internal integration with Microsoft.

The product has no deployment phase since the tool has an open-source version available on the cloud.

The solution is deployed on the cloud model.

I use the tool's free version.

The product is used in the development workflow because most of the open source software is in GitHub, so sometimes, just a couple of links to other software can be done easily.

GitHub is good for small companies and for personal use. GitLab is more useful for mid-sized and big companies.

I would not recommend the product for large development projects.

I recently learned more about AI. In the cloud, if I develop an application using AI and link it with GitHub, then I can create a web app linked with the solution. With the use of new codes in GitHub, it can trigger the app to be deployed automatically in the cloud. GitHub is useful for Windows-based applications, and it is the best choice because of the internal integration between both the tools.

In terms of the benefits derived from the use of the product, I would say that if you search for some technical or computer problems or issues, I think that 80 percent of them can be associated with GitHub's sample codes. The product is a place where developers can get clear knowledge about codes.

I use the centralized functions of the tool for my personal use.

Considering that the product is used by small companies or organizations where Windows-based products are used, I rate the tool nine out of ten.

The solution is used by developers to work as a team on a code. 

The control is the most valuable feature as developers can work on a single code. 

The initial setup requires heavy documentation which can be challenging for new developers. 

I have been using GitHub for more than a year. 

The solution is stable and I would rate the stability a ten out of ten. 

It is a scalable solution. 

Previously, we used IBM but because of the clients' requirements, we decided to move to GitHub. 

The initial setup is mostly straightforward. The deployment takes one hour. 

I would rate the overall solution a ten out of ten.

GitHub is used to maintain code in a centralized place, which allows multiple teams to work on the same repository. It is also integrated with Jira and other tools like CACD pipelines. GitHub streamlines project collaboration by enabling developers to clone, modify, and push changes into a centralized repo. It supports project collaboration for software development processes.

GitHub aids in distributing work among team members, allowing them to focus on their own tasks without worrying about conflicts. By integrating with Jira, it helps track the progress of tasks and their states, such as development, merge, or deployment. It provides a secure and reliable way to store business code.

The most valuable features of GitHub include its ability to integrate with Jira and multiple CI/CD platforms like Techton, allowing for seamless project management. Additionally, the pull request feature, which controls code insertion into branches by code owners, is highly beneficial.

GitHub could improve in resolving conflicts when multiple developers modify the same line of code. Introducing a feature to manage and resolve conflicts directly within the application rather than on local machines would be beneficial.

I have been using GitHub for four years.

GitHub is stable, as I have never encountered or heard of issues such as application crashes or data loss. Even if server issues occur, GitHub takes responsibility, ensuring stability.

As an intermediate-level user, I find GitHub's scalability to be high, rating it at nine out of ten. Its advanced features allow maintaining multiple projects effectively.

I don't have any experience with technical support for GitHub.

Positive

Previously, I used GitLab, which has its own pipeline features. GitHub was chosen for its maturity, reliability, and global adoption by many organizations for application development.

GitHub is easy to set up, rated ten out of ten. Users just need to set up a username, password, and create an access token. It is user-friendly even with basic knowledge, and the GitHub official page offers simple documentation.

Each individual is responsible for maintaining their repository. GitHub management and maintenance are handled by all project team members collectively.

I have not paid for GitHub as I use the free version for personal projects. Organizations may take separate servers from GitHub based on their needs, yet I am unaware of the pricing details.

Users can trust GitHub as a secure place to store their business code because many large organizations use it. It provides a reliable centralized location for maintaining repositories, and its maturity and research make it a best-in-class option.

I'd rate the solution ten out of ten.

For GitHub, we host our app there, and the code is secured up there in GitHub. We have multiple projects built there. The code is in the GitHub cloud, and we use it as a storage bucket for our codebase that stores our multiple projects and repositories. We use GitHub Actions to automate workflows; whenever we add a new feature to the project or app, GitHub Actions automates testing, deployment, and checks best code practices.

GitHub makes the process really fast for delivering projects, especially when multiple teams are contributing to a single project. It reduces the hassle by having all contributions in a single repository.

GitHub is easy, secure, and widely documented. We use GitHub Actions and Workflows for performing tests and deploying services quickly. It's a well-documented platform with functionalities that other repo systems lack.

GitHub could automate the setup process more, such as creating YAML files for GitHub Actions. The mobile application could be more useful, providing updates on iPhones or Android phones. There could be enhancements to automate branch deployments and other setups.

Currently, I'm working with GitHub. It's been about six years.

GitHub is super convenient and stable, which contributes to its popularity.

GitHub is scalable; I have worked on solutions with tons of features and thousands of branches in a single repository without any glitches.

I have worked with Bitbucket. Bitbucket is useful for creating private repositories, but GitHub is more convenient and vastly documented. It is more widely used and established as a standard.

The initial setup of GitHub is very straightforward and well documented. Even if someone is new to it, they can easily find guidance from online resources.

I have used Bitbucket as well.

While creating repositories, it's important to read all the documentation, especially when setting permissions or creating tokens. Missteps can create problems.

I'd rate the solution ten out of ten.

You can write the code with AI. But when it comes to implementation, you must upgrade the bits of code that will support this and generate solutions based on that architecture. Then, you need comparable code bits. Therefore, AI can propose how much a specific function can be better optimized. So, AI can help stakeholders reach tasks quicker.

I decided not to use GitHub but developed my tool because I found it more efficient. I'm familiar with my tools, making them easier to use. I like being able to customize them to fit my workflow and the way I think.. Software development is like a personal workshop, and I tailor my version control to match my approach. 

You have to do the crazy things to make real changes. Everything stays the same without them. Having a good backup system is crucial. If something goes wrong, you can roll back to a stable state. This mindset drives me to create tools that align with my thinking. These methods aren't easily accommodated on platforms like GitHub, so I prefer to use my tools. 

The solution is the priority, not the specific tools or methods used. For example, imagine you need a simple solution, like a pizza kiosk locator. You're driving and want to find a pizza place quickly. The solution should focus on delivering this functionality, perhaps using Google Maps integration. The key is prioritizing the solution over the technical components.

The solution should allow you to press a button, see the distance to the nearest pizza place, navigate there easily, and even contact them if needed. Companies have resources and processes. The key lies in leveraging these resources to enhance business processes and stay competitive. The primary focus should always be improving efficiency and competitiveness through better combinations and evolution of these processes.

Despite its age, GitHub still holds value, especially in its older functions. However, to maintain relevance and satisfy existing and new users, GitHub should develop newer functions while preserving its traditional ones. This balance would ensure the community's satisfaction and integrate newer features. It seems they're already aware of this need and are working on it, so it's reasonable to expect gradual improvements over time.

The tool is scalable. 

GitHub has become a standard in software development, with millions of users, solutions, and a vast array of software packages and commits. It's reliable, proven, and fosters a strong social community. However, it's important to recognize that not all development processes fit within the GitHub model. In some cases, like ours, we have a unique setup where certain components, like front end and JavaScript libraries, can be hosted on GitHub, while others, like the database, are better managed internally with our tools.

Many solutions are inherently vendor-specific because they reflect the unique way each company conducts its business. These processes often give companies a competitive edge, and they're closely guarded as proprietary secrets. Exposing these processes to a wider audience could diminish that competitive advantage.

Lufthansa, for instance, relies on around ten thousand applications developed in-house and with partners to run their core business operations. 

Similarly, as a competitor in Formula One racing, Ferrari undoubtedly has closely guarded secrets contributing to its success.

SAP encountered issues with its approach to creating minimal solutions for small and medium-sized businesses (SMBs). While they intended to cater to smaller companies, cutting functions led to a loss of value, making it no longer truly SAP. Similarly, many large companies adopting out-of-the-box SAP solutions found their processes becoming standardized, causing dissatisfaction. Companies wanted their unique processes preserved, not homogenized like competitors'.

I rate the overall product an eight out of ten. 

The solution is used to store code. It is a repository manager for our code. We can also configure it to run our deployment.

It is a good product. The tool doesn’t incur a lot of cost. It is highly stable. We can easily integrate our deployment to achieve continuous integration and continuous delivery.

The product must document the CI/CD process more. It must also expose the APIs for CI/CD.

I have been using the solution since 2016.

I rate the tool’s stability a ten out of ten. It is highly available. I have not encountered any issues.

I rate the tool’s scalability a ten out of ten. I have not encountered any issues with the scalability. I am using the tool for my personal projects. If I needed someone to collaborate, a maximum of five people would have access to the tool. I do not have plans to increase the usage for now.

The solution is cloud-based. I do not have to deploy it.

Our code is secure. We can easily roll back the changes. We can take features to the market a bit faster.

It’s an open-source solution. We do not have to pay for it.

I will recommend the product to others. Overall, I rate the tool a ten out of ten.

We use GitHub to track what kind of libraries you are using.

The most valuable feature of the solution is the version control field. GitHub has a good integration and coding engine.

It would be beneficial if GitHub provided some security scanning for new libraries to ensure that there are no viruses in it. The solution’s stability could be a bit better.

I have been using GitHub for two months.

I rate the solution a seven out of ten for stability.

Around 30 users use the solution regularly in our organization, and we plan to increase the usage.

I have previously used Bitbucket.

The solution's implementation takes a long time.

We pay a licensing fee for GitHub, which could be cheaper.

The solution is deployed on the cloud in our organization. I would recommend the solution to other users. GitHub is a version control, and you can always switch and text because every version is saved.

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

One major disadvantage, which I believe GitHub is and which the tool should work on, is that it does not provide good reporting capabilities from a compliance perspective. If we are using GitHub for 500 users, sometimes the compliance team asks for a certain kind of report on how many users are not active and who left the company, and GitHub does not provide such a granular report. GitHub should improve its reporting capability.

GitHub should work on enhancing its search capability. The tool should add some more features and functionalities.

I have been using GitHub for six to seven years.

Performance-wise, if we have set it up properly, we will not encounter any major performance issues with the tool. It works fine.

My company has an enterprise-level setup, so we have a large user base.

The technical support of the solution is good, and our company has used it for GitHub upgrades. We raised our tickets with the support team. Support-wise, GitHub is good. They respond back on time and give us the exact SOP, which we need to follow when we run into some specific issue where we need their support. Support-wise, they are good. I rate the technical support an eight out of ten.

Positive

Some other teams in my company use GitHub Actions.

The product's initial setup phase is straightforward. It is not very difficult. In our company, we have a setup on the server and on AWS also. We are using the cloud version of GitHub.

The tool's pricing was compatible with our company's needs. As far as other tools are concerned, I think, in terms of price, GitHub is okay compared to other tools.

Before GitHub, we used Perforce and some other products as source code management tools. GitHub is more agile-centric and flexible than other tools. GitHub is better accepted as a source code management tool, and that is the reason we are also using it in our company.

My company started to use GitHub as it is well-integrated with other tools and as it provides better support. Suppose you go into some issue or something like that. GitHub's support structure is better, allowing you to do more hit-and-test on the solutions than other tools. With GitHub as a tool, if you run into some issues, you get a lot of articles over the internet. Support-wise, GitHub is a better tool.

GitHub provides you with code-scanning capabilities. If we are using GitHub for CI/CD, it does provide such capabilities. From the code review point, it provides us with a feature to protect our branches and all that. It provides us the feature to help decide who can push to the repository or how many levels of reviews are required. I think these tools should work more on branching. In the branching area, the tool should provide a bit more flexibility.

My company has a couple of AI-driven projects managed with the tool.

The tool is not difficult to maintain.

GitHub is more development-centric and agile-centric, and it integrates with all our CI/CD tools and other things. The tool helps across the project teams to get things automated, and it helps in the quality review process, so eventually, it helps in quality delivery.

.

If some organization wants to go ahead with GitHub, there are definitely no cons or anything for which you will say that business units or companies would not go ahead with it.

I rate the tool an eight out of ten.