Need advice about which tool to choose?Ask the StackShare community!
AWS CodeCommit vs Bitbucket vs GitHub: What are the differences?
AWS CodeCommit is a cloud-based repository management system for storing and management of assets. The assets can be source code, binary files, and documents. Offers full compatibility to Git as well, allowing you to move your local repositories to cloud-based repositories in CodeCommit. Bitbucket allows integrations with different sources. A web-based version-control-repository hosting service owned by Atlassian, Bitbucket is used extensively for source code and development projects that use either Mercurial or Git revision control systems. Github is now an industry as well as a coding norm. Easy to use, intuitive, accessible, with the simplest of user interfaces. Almost every open source system uses Git these days.
We are using a Bitbucket server, and due to migration efforts and new Atlassian community license changes, we need to move to a new self-hosted solution. The new data-center license for Atlassian, available in February, will be community provisioned (free). Along with that community license, other technologies will be coming with it (Crucible, Confluence, and Jira). Is there value in a paid-for license to get the GitHub Enterprise? Are the tools that come with it worth the cost?
I know it is about $20 per 10 seats, and we have about 300 users. Have other convertees to Microsoft's tools found it easy to do a migration? Is the toolset that much more beneficial to the free suite that one can get from Atlassian?
So far, free seems to be the winner, and the familiarization with Atlassian implementation and maintenance is understood. Going to GitHub, are there any distinct challenges to be found or any perks to be attained?
These are pretty competitive, and to recommend one over the other would require understanding your usage. Also, what other tools you use: for instance, what do you use for Issue-tracking, or for build pipelines. In your case, since you are already using Bitbucket, the question would be: do you have any current pain-points? And, on the other hand, do you already use Atlassian's JIRA, where you'd benefit from the tight integration? So, though I would not recommend one over the other just in general,. But, if Bitbucket fulfills your current use-cases, then there seems to be little motivation to move.
Hi, I need advice. In my project, we are using Bitbucket hosted on-prem, Jenkins, and Jira. Also, we have restrictions not to use any plugins for code review, code quality, code security, etc., with bitbucket. Now we want to migrate to AWS CodeCommit, which would mean that we can use, let's say, Amazon CodeGuru for code reviews and move to AWS CodeBuild and AWS CodePipeline for build automation in the future rather than using Jenkins.
Now I want advice on below.
- Is it a good idea to migrate from Bitbucket to AWS Codecommit?
- If we want to integrate Jira with AWS Codecommit, then how can we do this? If a developer makes any changes in Jira, then a build should be triggered automatically in AWS and create a Jira ticket if the build fails. So, how can we achieve this?
Hi Kavita. It would be useful to explain in a bit more detail the integration to Jira you would like to achieve. Some of the Jira plugins will work with any git repository, regardless if its github/bitbucket/gitlab.
Both of us are far more familiar with GitHub than Gitlab, and so for our first big project together decided to go with what we know here instead of figuring out something new (there are so many new things we need to figure out, might as well reduce the number of optionally new things, lol). We aren't currently taking advantage of GitHub Actions or very many other built-in features (besides Dependabot) but luckily it integrates very well with the other services we're using.
I first used BitBucket because it had private repo's, and it didn't disappoint me. Also with the smooth integration of Jira, the decision to use BitBucket as a full application maintenance service was as easy as 1, 2, 3.
I honestly love BitBucket, by the looks, by the UI, and the smooth integration with Tower.
Do you review your Pull/Merge Request before assigning Reviewers?
If you work in a team opening a Pull Request (or Merge Request) looks appropriate. However, have you ever thought about opening a Pull/Merge Request when working by yourself? Here's a checklist of things you can review in your own:
- Pick the correct target branch
- Make Drafts explicit
- Name things properly
- Ask help for tools
- Remove the noise
- Fetch necessary data
- Understand Mergeability
- Pass the message
- Add screenshots
- Be found in the future
- Comment inline in your changes
Read the blog post for more detailed explanation for each item :D
What else do you review before asking for code review?
Using an inclusive language is crucial for fostering a diverse culture. Git has changed the naming conventions to be more language-inclusive, and so you should change. Our development tools, like GitHub and GitLab, already supports the change.
SourceLevel deals very nicely with repositories that changed the master branch to a more appropriate word. Besides, you can use the grep linter the look for exclusive terms contained in the source code.
As the inclusive language gap may happen in other aspects of our lives, have you already thought about them?
One of the magic tricks git performs is the ability to rewrite log history. You can do it in many ways, but
git rebase -i is the one I most use. With this command, It’s possible to switch commits order, remove a commit, squash two or more commits, or edit, for instance.
It’s particularly useful to run it before opening a pull request. It allows developers to “clean up” the mess and organize commits before submitting to review. If you follow the practice 3 and 4, then the list of commits should look very similar to a task list. It should reveal the rationale you had, telling the story of how you end up with that final code.
Out of most of the VCS solutions out there, we found Gitlab was the most feature complete with a free community edition. Their DevSecops offering is also a very robust solution. Gitlab CI/CD was quite easy to setup and the direct integration with your VCS + CI/CD is also a bonus. Out of the box integration with major cloud providers, alerting through instant messages etc. are all extremely convenient. We push our CI/CD updates to MS Teams.
Gitlab as A LOT of features that GitHub and Azure DevOps are missing. Even if both GH and Azure are backed by Microsoft, GitLab being open source has a faster upgrade rate and the hosted by gitlab.com solution seems more appealing than anything else! Quick win: the UI is way better and the Pipeline is way easier to setup on GitLab!
At DeployPlace we use self-hosted GitLab, we have chosen GitLab as most of us are familiar with it. We are happy with all features GitLab provides, I can’t imagine our life without integrated GitLab CI. Another important feature for us is integrated code review tool, we use it every day, we use merge requests, code reviews, branching. To be honest, most of us have GitHub accounts as well, we like to contribute in open source, and we want to be a part of the tech community, but lack of solutions from GitHub in the area of CI doesn’t let us chose it for our projects.
Pros of AWS CodeCommit
- Free private repos43
- IAM integration26
- Pay-As-You-Go Pricing23
- Amazon feels the most Secure19
- Repo data encrypted at rest19
- I can make repository by myself if I have AWS account11
- Faster deployments when using other AWS services11
- AWS CodePipeline integration7
- Codebuild integration6
- Does not support web hooks yet! :(6
- Cost Effective4
- Elastic Beanstalk Integration2
- No Git LFS! Dealbreaker for me2
- Integrated with AWS Ecosystem2
- Integration via SQS/SNS for events (replaces webhooks)1
- Open source friendly1
- Issue tracker1
- Only US Region1
- Available in Ireland (Dublin) region1
- CodeDeploy Integration1
- CodeCommit Trigger for an AWS Lambda Function1
Pros of Bitbucket
- Free private repos905
- Simple setup397
- Nice ui and tools348
- Unlimited private repositories341
- Affordable git hosting240
- Integrates with many apis and services123
- Reliable uptime119
- Nice gui87
- Pull requests and code reviews85
- Very customisable58
- Mercurial repositories16
- SourceTree integration14
- JIRA integration12
- Track every commit to an issue in JIRA10
- Deployment hooks8
- Best free alternative to Github8
- Automatically share repositories with all your teammates7
- Compatible with Mac and Windows7
- Source Code Insight6
- Login with Google5
- Create a wiki5
- Approve pull request button5
- Customizable pipelines4
- #2 Atlassian Product after JIRA4
- Continuous Integration and Delivery3
- Also supports Mercurial3
- Unlimited Private Repos at no cost3
- Academic license program2
- Multilingual interface2
- Open source friendly2
- Issues tracker2
- IAM integration2
- Mercurial Support2
Pros of GitHub
- Open source friendly1.8K
- Easy source control1.5K
- Nice UI1.3K
- Great for team collaboration1.1K
- Easy setup865
- Issue tracker504
- Great community485
- Remote team collaboration481
- Great way to share451
- Pull request and features planning442
- Just works146
- Integrated in many tools132
- Free Public Repos120
- Github Gists115
- Github pages111
- Easy to find repos83
- Open source62
- It's free60
- Easy to find projects60
- Network effect56
- Extensive API49
- Developer Profiles34
- Git Powered Wikis32
- Great for collaboration30
- It's fun24
- Clean interface and good integrations23
- Community SDK involvement22
- Learn from others source code20
- Because: Git16
- It integrates directly with Azure14
- Standard in Open Source collab10
- Beautiful user experience8
- It integrates directly with Hipchat8
- Easy to discover new code libraries7
- Smooth integration6
- It's awesome6
- Nice API6
- Cloud SCM6
- Hands down best online Git service available5
- CI Integration5
- Quick Onboarding5
- Remarkable uptime5
- Security options4
- Simple but powerful4
- Loved by developers4
- Easy to use and collaborate with others4
- Version Control4
- Unlimited Public Repos at no cost4
- Uses GIT4
- Free HTML hosting4
- Nice to use3
- Free private repos2
- Issues tracker2
- Easy deployment via SSH2
- Easy source control and everything is backed up2
- IAM integration2
- Easy and efficient maintainance of the projects2
- All in one development service2
- Good tools support2
- Free HTML hostings2
- Self Hosted2
- Never dethroned2
- Very Easy to Use2
- Easy to use2
- Leads the copycats2
Sign up to add or upvote prosMake informed product decisions
Cons of AWS CodeCommit
- UI sucks12
- No Issue Tracker3
- Bad diffing/no blame2
- NO LFS support2
- No fork2
- No webhooks2
- Can't download file from UI1
- Only time based triggers1
- Accident-prone UI0
Cons of Bitbucket
- Not much community activity19
- Difficult to review prs because of confusing ui17
- Quite buggy15
- Managed by enterprise Java company10
- CI tool is not free of charge8
- Complexity with rights management7
- Only 5 collaborators for private repos6
- Slow performance4
- No AWS Codepipelines integration2
- No more Mercurial repositories1
- No server side git-hook support1
Cons of GitHub
- Owned by micrcosoft53
- Expensive for lone developers that want private repos37
- Relatively slow product/feature release cadence15
- API scoping could be better10
- Only 3 collaborators for private repos8
- Limited featureset for issue management3
- GitHub Packages does not support SNAPSHOT versions2
- Does not have a graph for showing history like git lens2
- Have to use a token for the package registry1
- No multilingual interface1
- Takes a long time to commit1
Sign up to add or upvote consMake informed product decisions
What is AWS CodeCommit?
What is Bitbucket?
What is GitHub?
Need advice about which tool to choose?Ask the StackShare community!
Sign up to get full access to all the companiesMake informed product decisions
What tools integrate with AWS CodeCommit?
What tools integrate with GitHub?
Sign up to get full access to all the tool integrationsMake informed product decisions