Bitbucket vs Reviewable

Overview

Bitbucket

Stacks41.1K

Followers33.4K

Votes2.8K

Reviewable

Stacks17

Followers32

Votes23

Bitbucket vs Reviewable: What are the differences?

# Key Differences between Bitbucket and Reviewable

Bitbucket and Reviewable are both popular tools for code review and collaboration among development teams. However, they differ in several key aspects.

1. **Integration with Version Control Systems**: Bitbucket is a platform that is closely integrated with Git repositories, providing seamless integration for teams using Git for version control. On the other hand, Reviewable is not tied to any specific version control system, making it more versatile for teams using different VCS providers.

2. **User Interface and User Experience**: Bitbucket offers a comprehensive user interface for managing code repositories, pull requests, and code reviews, making it a one-stop solution for many development teams. In contrast, Reviewable focuses on providing a streamlined and intuitive user experience specifically for code reviews, with additional features like inline commenting and batch reviewing for efficient collaboration.

3. **Customizability and Extensions**: Bitbucket provides a wide range of plugins and integrations to extend its functionality, allowing teams to customize their workflows and enhance their productivity. Reviewable, on the other hand, offers fewer customization options but focuses on delivering a robust and efficient code review experience out of the box.

4. **Pricing and Licensing**: Bitbucket offers both free and paid plans with pricing based on the number of users and storage requirements, making it suitable for teams of all sizes. Reviewable, on the other hand, follows a subscription-based model with pricing based on the number of repositories and users, catering more towards professional teams and organizations.

5. **Automation and Workflow Automation**: Bitbucket provides extensive automation features such as pull request merging, branching strategies, and build status integration, streamlining the development workflow for teams. Reviewable, while offering automated code review processes, focuses more on enhancing the manual code review experience through collaboration tools and feedback mechanisms.

6. **Scalability and Performance**: Bitbucket is designed to handle large codebases and high traffic volumes, providing scalability and performance optimizations for enterprise-level teams. Reviewable is optimized for smaller to medium-sized teams, offering responsive performance and effective code review capabilities for mid-sized projects.

In Summary, Bitbucket and Reviewable offer distinct features in terms of version control integration, user interface, customizability, pricing, automation, and scalability to cater to the diverse needs of development teams.

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)

Manual

Advice on Bitbucket, Reviewable

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

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

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	Reviewable
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.	A code review tool for GitHub pull requests inspired by Google's internal tool. Powerful diffing and workflow features wrapped in a beautiful UI, with seamless GitHub integration. Free for public repos.
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	See only what changed since last time you looked (even if rebased).;Instantly diff any two revisions of a file, in one or two columns.;Customize code font, syntax highlighting, max line length.;Tracks reviewed files, unreplied / unresolved comments.;Comments map across code changes, never disappear.;Send all comments in one batch, or one at a time.;Open files on the right line directly in your editor.
Statistics
Stacks 41.1K	Stacks 17
Followers 33.4K	Followers 32
Votes 2.8K	Votes 23
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 5 Batch commenting 4 Makes me feel organised and in control 4 Easy to use 3 Efficient comment paging 3 Easy incremental reviewing
Integrations
Git AWS Cloud9 Sentry Microsoft Azure npm Trello Slack Confluence Docker Jira	GitHub

What are some alternatives to Bitbucket, Reviewable?

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 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

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 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 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

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.

Phabricator

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

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

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

Related Comparisons

Bitbucket vs Reviewable: What are the differences?

# Key Differences between Bitbucket and Reviewable

Bitbucket and Reviewable are both popular tools for code review and collaboration among development teams. However, they differ in several key aspects.

1. **Integration with Version Control Systems**: Bitbucket is a platform that is closely integrated with Git repositories, providing seamless integration for teams using Git for version control. On the other hand, Reviewable is not tied to any specific version control system, making it more versatile for teams using different VCS providers.

2. **User Interface and User Experience**: Bitbucket offers a comprehensive user interface for managing code repositories, pull requests, and code reviews, making it a one-stop solution for many development teams. In contrast, Reviewable focuses on providing a streamlined and intuitive user experience specifically for code reviews, with additional features like inline commenting and batch reviewing for efficient collaboration.

3. **Customizability and Extensions**: Bitbucket provides a wide range of plugins and integrations to extend its functionality, allowing teams to customize their workflows and enhance their productivity. Reviewable, on the other hand, offers fewer customization options but focuses on delivering a robust and efficient code review experience out of the box.

4. **Pricing and Licensing**: Bitbucket offers both free and paid plans with pricing based on the number of users and storage requirements, making it suitable for teams of all sizes. Reviewable, on the other hand, follows a subscription-based model with pricing based on the number of repositories and users, catering more towards professional teams and organizations.

5. **Automation and Workflow Automation**: Bitbucket provides extensive automation features such as pull request merging, branching strategies, and build status integration, streamlining the development workflow for teams. Reviewable, while offering automated code review processes, focuses more on enhancing the manual code review experience through collaboration tools and feedback mechanisms.

6. **Scalability and Performance**: Bitbucket is designed to handle large codebases and high traffic volumes, providing scalability and performance optimizations for enterprise-level teams. Reviewable is optimized for smaller to medium-sized teams, offering responsive performance and effective code review capabilities for mid-sized projects.

Bitbucket vs Reviewable

Overview