StackShareStackShare
Follow on
StackShare

Discover and share technology stacks from companies around the world.

Follow on

© 2025 StackShare. All rights reserved.

Product

  • Stacks
  • Tools
  • Feed

Company

  • About
  • Contact

Legal

  • Privacy Policy
  • Terms of Service
  1. Stackups
  2. DevOps
  3. Code Collaboration
  4. Code Collaboration Version Control
  5. Bitbucket vs Phabricator

Bitbucket vs Phabricator

OverviewDecisionsComparisonAlternatives

Overview

Bitbucket
Bitbucket
Stacks41.1K
Followers33.4K
Votes2.8K
Phabricator
Phabricator
Stacks221
Followers323
Votes187

Bitbucket vs Phabricator: What are the differences?

## Introduction
Here are the key differences between Bitbucket and Phabricator:

1. **Integration**: Bitbucket integrates seamlessly with Jira, allowing for easy management of issues, agile boards, and workflows together. Phabricator, on the other hand, offers integration with a wide range of tools but may require some configuration for seamless synchronization.
2. **Code Review Process**: Bitbucket provides a simple and straightforward code review process with the use of pull requests. Phabricator offers a more advanced and customizable code review process with features like Herald rules, which automate specific actions based on certain conditions.
3. **Workflow Customization**: Bitbucket's workflow customization capabilities are limited compared to Phabricator, which allows extensive customization through the use of Maniphest, allowing teams to create custom workflows tailored to their specific needs.
4. **Continuous Integration**: Bitbucket offers native integration with Bitbucket Pipelines for continuous integration and delivery (CI/CD) pipelines. Phabricator requires the use of external tools like Jenkins for setting up CI/CD pipelines.
5. **Documentation**: Bitbucket provides basic documentation features such as wikis and README files within repositories. Phabricator offers a more comprehensive documentation engine called Phriction, which allows for rich text editing and the creation of detailed documentation pages.
6. **Permissions and Access Control**: Bitbucket has a more straightforward permission and access control system, allowing for easy management of user roles and permissions. Phabricator offers a more granular control system with the use of audit and authentication policies for added security and compliance.

In Summary, the key differences between Bitbucket and Phabricator lie in integration capabilities, code review processes, workflow customization, continuous integration tools, documentation features, and permissions/access control systems.

Share your Stack

Help developers discover the tools you use. Get visibility for your team's tech choices and contribute to the community's knowledge.

View Docs
CLI (Node.js)
or
Manual

Advice on Bitbucket, Phabricator

Weverton
Weverton

CTO at SourceLevel

Aug 3, 2020

Review

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?

1.19M views1.19M
Comments
Weverton
Weverton

CTO at SourceLevel

Jul 22, 2020

Review

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.

1.1M views1.1M
Comments
Elmar
Elmar

CEO, Managing Director at Wouters Media

Nov 9, 2020

Decided

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.

586k views586k
Comments

Detailed Comparison

Bitbucket
Bitbucket
Phabricator
Phabricator

Bitbucket gives teams one place to plan projects, collaborate on code, test and deploy, all with free private Git repositories. Teams choose Bitbucket because it has a superior Jira integration, built-in CI/CD, & is free for up to 5 users.

Phabricator is a collection of open source web applications that help software companies build better software.

Unlimited private repositories, charged per user;Best-in-class Jira integration;Built-in CI/CD;Deployment visibility;Embedded Trello boards; Command Instructions;Source Browser;Git Powered Wikis;Integrated Issue Tracking;Code reviews with inline comments;Compare View;Newsfeed;Followers;Developer Profiles;Autocompletion for @username mentions;Support for Mercurial
reviewing code before it hits master; auditing code after it hits master; hosting Git/Hg/SVN repositories; tracking bugs or "features"; counting down to HL3; expounding liberal tomes of text; nit picking pixels with designers; "project" "manage" "ment"; hiding stuff from coworkers; and also other random things, like memes, badges, and tokens.
Statistics
Stacks
41.1K
Stacks
221
Followers
33.4K
Followers
323
Votes
2.8K
Votes
187
Pros & Cons
Pros
  • 905
    Free private repos
  • 397
    Simple setup
  • 349
    Nice ui and tools
  • 342
    Unlimited private repositories
  • 240
    Affordable git hosting
Cons
  • 19
    Not much community activity
  • 17
    Difficult to review prs because of confusing ui
  • 15
    Quite buggy
  • 10
    Managed by enterprise Java company
  • 8
    CI tool is not free of charge
Pros
  • 33
    Open Source
  • 29
    Code Review
  • 25
    Supports Git/Hg/SVN
  • 18
    Bug Tracking
  • 17
    Audit Source Code
Integrations
Git
Git
AWS Cloud9
AWS Cloud9
Sentry
Sentry
Microsoft Azure
Microsoft Azure
npm
npm
Trello
Trello
Slack
Slack
Confluence
Confluence
Docker
Docker
Jira
Jira
Asana
Asana
Jira
Jira
CircleCI
CircleCI
Jenkins
Jenkins
SVN (Subversion)
SVN (Subversion)
Git
Git
Mercurial
Mercurial

What are some alternatives to Bitbucket, Phabricator?

GitHub

GitHub

GitHub is the best place to share code with friends, co-workers, classmates, and complete strangers. Over three million people use GitHub to build amazing things together.

GitLab

GitLab

GitLab offers git repository management, code reviews, issue tracking, activity feeds and wikis. Enterprises install GitLab on-premise and connect it with LDAP and Active Directory servers for secure authentication and authorization. A single GitLab server can handle more than 25,000 users but it is also possible to create a high availability setup with multiple active servers.

Code Climate

Code Climate

After each Git push, Code Climate analyzes your code for complexity, duplication, and common smells to determine changes in quality and surface technical debt hotspots.

Codacy

Codacy

Codacy automates code reviews and monitors code quality on every commit and pull request on more than 40 programming languages reporting back the impact of every commit or PR, issues concerning code style, best practices and security.

RhodeCode

RhodeCode

RhodeCode provides centralized control over distributed code repositories. Developers get code review tools and custom APIs that work in Mercurial, Git & SVN. Firms get unified security and user control so that their CTOs can sleep at night

AWS CodeCommit

AWS CodeCommit

CodeCommit eliminates the need to operate your own source control system or worry about scaling its infrastructure. You can use CodeCommit to securely store anything from source code to binaries, and it works seamlessly with your existing Git tools.

Gogs

Gogs

The goal of this project is to make the easiest, fastest and most painless way to set up a self-hosted Git service. With Go, this can be done in independent binary distribution across ALL platforms that Go supports, including Linux, Mac OS X, and Windows.

Gitea

Gitea

Git with a cup of tea! Painless self-hosted all-in-one software development service, including Git hosting, code review, team collaboration, package registry and CI/CD. It published under the MIT license.

PullReview

PullReview

PullReview helps Ruby and Rails developers to develop new features cleanly, on-time, and with confidence by automatically reviewing their code.

Gerrit Code Review

Gerrit Code Review

Gerrit is a self-hosted pre-commit code review tool. It serves as a Git hosting server with option to comment incoming changes. It is highly configurable and extensible with default guarding policies, webhooks, project access control and more.

Related Comparisons

GitHub
Bitbucket

Bitbucket vs GitHub vs GitLab

GitHub
Bitbucket

AWS CodeCommit vs Bitbucket vs GitHub

Kubernetes
Rancher

Docker Swarm vs Kubernetes vs Rancher

gulp
Grunt

Grunt vs Webpack vs gulp

Graphite
Kibana

Grafana vs Graphite vs Kibana