Need advice about which tool to choose?Ask the StackShare community!
GitHub vs Google Cloud Source Repositories: What are the differences?
Introduction
This Markdown code provides a comparison between GitHub and Google Cloud Source Repositories to highlight their key differences.
Integration with Other Services: GitHub offers seamless integration with a wide range of third-party development tools and services, making it easier for developers to leverage different services within their workflows. On the other hand, Google Cloud Source Repositories are tightly integrated with Google Cloud Platform (GCP) services, enabling developers to easily connect repositories with other GCP tools like Cloud Build and Stackdriver.
Pricing: GitHub offers free public repositories, allowing developers to host and collaborate on open-source projects without any cost. However, private repositories and additional features come with a price. Google Cloud Source Repositories, in contrast, provide free unlimited private repositories for up to five users, making it a cost-effective option for small development teams. Additional charges apply for larger teams.
Access Control and Authentication: GitHub enables granular access control by allowing organizations to manage and assign repository-level permissions to individual users and teams. It also provides features like two-factor authentication (2FA) for enhanced security. Google Cloud Source Repositories integrate with Google Cloud Identity and Access Management (IAM), offering fine-grained access control at the project level. User roles and permissions can be managed through IAM policies.
Continuous Integration and Deployment: GitHub provides built-in CI/CD capabilities with GitHub Actions, allowing developers to automate software workflows easily. Developers can define custom workflows or use pre-existing actions from the GitHub Marketplace. Google Cloud Source Repositories integrate with Cloud Build, Google's CI/CD platform, making it easy to trigger builds and deployments based on repository changes.
Large File Storage: GitHub limits the file size for repositories, making it less suitable for managing large datasets or multimedia assets. Google Cloud Source Repositories have a much higher file size limit, accommodating larger files and making it a better choice for projects requiring storage of large binaries or media files.
Backup and Disaster Recovery: GitHub automatically replicates repositories across multiple geographic regions, ensuring durability and availability. Additionally, it provides a variety of backup and restore options. Google Cloud Source Repositories leverage Google Cloud Storage's built-in replication and data redundancy features, providing robust backup and disaster recovery capabilities.
In summary, GitHub and Google Cloud Source Repositories differ in terms of integration with other services, pricing models, access control and authentication methods, CI/CD capabilities, file storage limits, and backup/restore mechanisms.
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 GitHub
- Open source friendly1.8K
- Easy source control1.5K
- Nice UI1.3K
- Great for team collaboration1.1K
- Easy setup867
- Issue tracker504
- Great community487
- Remote team collaboration483
- Great way to share449
- Pull request and features planning442
- Just works147
- Integrated in many tools132
- Free Public Repos122
- Github Gists116
- Github pages113
- Easy to find repos83
- Open source62
- Easy to find projects60
- It's free60
- Network effect56
- Extensive API49
- Organizations43
- Branching42
- 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
- Newsfeed10
- Fast8
- Beautiful user experience8
- It integrates directly with Hipchat8
- Easy to discover new code libraries7
- Smooth integration6
- Integrations6
- Graphs6
- Nice API6
- It's awesome6
- Cloud SCM6
- Quick Onboarding5
- Remarkable uptime5
- CI Integration5
- Reliable5
- Hands down best online Git service available5
- Version Control4
- Unlimited Public Repos at no cost4
- Simple but powerful4
- Loved by developers4
- Free HTML hosting4
- Uses GIT4
- Security options4
- Easy to use and collaborate with others4
- Easy deployment via SSH3
- Ci3
- IAM3
- Nice to use3
- Easy and efficient maintainance of the projects2
- Beautiful2
- Self Hosted2
- Issues tracker2
- Easy source control and everything is backed up2
- Never dethroned2
- All in one development service2
- Good tools support2
- Free HTML hostings2
- IAM integration2
- Very Easy to Use2
- Easy to use2
- Leads the copycats2
- Free private repos2
- Profound1
- Dasf1
Pros of Google Cloud Source Repositories
Sign up to add or upvote prosMake informed product decisions
Cons of GitHub
- Owned by micrcosoft54
- Expensive for lone developers that want private repos38
- Relatively slow product/feature release cadence15
- API scoping could be better10
- Only 3 collaborators for private repos9
- Limited featureset for issue management4
- Does not have a graph for showing history like git lens3
- GitHub Packages does not support SNAPSHOT versions2
- No multilingual interface1
- Takes a long time to commit1
- Expensive1