AWS CodeCommit vs Apache Subversion comparison

Apache and Amazon Web Services (AWS) are both solutions in the Version Control category. Apache is ranked #10 with an average rating of 6.5, while Amazon Web Services (AWS) is ranked #4 with an average rating of 8.0. Apache holds a 2.2% mindshare in VC, compared to Amazon Web Services (AWS)’s 5.0% mindshare. Additionally, 42% of Apache users are willing to recommend the solution, compared to 83% of Amazon Web Services (AWS) users who would recommend it.

Apache Subversion

Read 5 Apache Subversion reviews

232 Views
232 Comparison Views

42% willing to recommend

AWS CodeCommit

Read 12 AWS CodeCommit reviews

944 Views
944 Comparison Views

83% willing to recommend

Apache Subversion

AWS CodeCommit

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Download the report

Executive SummaryUpdated on Aug 14, 2024

Apache Subversion and AWS CodeCommit are both popular repository management tools. AWS CodeCommit's features are considered superior and worth the additional cost.

Features: Apache Subversion offers robust version control, extensive third-party integration, and strong pricing and support. AWS CodeCommit is prized for its scalability, seamless Git integration, and support for AWS ecosystem services. AWS CodeCommit is generally seen as more feature-rich.

Room for Improvement: Apache Subversion has limited scalability and complex merge conflict resolution. AWS CodeCommit experiences occasional latency issues and has a steep learning curve for new users. Subversion’s scalability concerns are more critical.

Ease of Deployment and Customer Service: Apache Subversion has straightforward deployment, but some users find customer service lacking. AWS CodeCommit offers easier deployment within the AWS ecosystem and has strong customer support. AWS CodeCommit stands out for its seamless deployment process.

Pricing and ROI: Apache Subversion's setup costs are lower and users report a stronger ROI. AWS CodeCommit’s pricing is perceived as higher but justified by its advanced features. Despite its higher cost, the overall ROI for AWS CodeCommit is favorable for those integrating into the AWS ecosystem.

To learn more, read our detailed AWS CodeCommit vs. Apache Subversion Report (Updated: July 2025).

Buyer's Guide

AWS CodeCommit vs. Apache Subversion

July 2025

Download the complete report

Helped 865,384 peers since 2012

Review summaries and opinions

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:

Categories and Ranking

Apache Subversion

Ranking in Version Control

10th

Average Rating

7.0

Reviews Sentiment

5.5

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

No ranking in other categories

AWS CodeCommit

Ranking in Version Control

4th

Average Rating

8.0

Reviews Sentiment

6.9

Number of Reviews

Ranking in other categories

No ranking in other categories

Mindshare comparison

As of August 2025, in the Version Control category, the mindshare of Apache Subversion is 2.2%, up from 0.7% compared to the previous year. The mindshare of AWS CodeCommit is 5.0%, down from 7.8% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.

Version Control

Featured Reviews

Vijay Londhe

Assistant Programmer at Mahadis

Enables centralized code management but lacks modern CI/CD integrations

There is room for improvement in Apache Subversion, especially when comparing it with other version control systems such as GitHub or GitLab, where many improvements could be made. Improvements I would like to see in Apache Subversion include configurations, customizations, and functionalities such as those provided by GitHub Actions for immediate pipeline triggers, as well as the version controlling and CI/CD platform offered by GitLab. In future updates of Apache Subversion, I would like to see CI/CD integrations as well as build and deployment servers. The lack of latest features includes basic requirements such as pull requests, CI/CD platform integration, and artifact storage such as GitHub packages, which it does not offer.

Read full review

Munisaiteja Narravula

AWS Engineer at 6thgen

Efficient integration of code changes with seamless private repository management

AWS CodeCommit is highly user-friendly. It doesn't require any complex authentication, which makes the process seamless. Deployments happen in a straightforward manner once the code is organized correctly in the repository. The platform allows the creation of private repositories, securing and restricting access to our team members only. This ensures that unauthorized users cannot access sensitive files. AWS CodeCommit also integrates well when we use it with Check Point allowing us to implement information in the criteria we need.

Read full review

Quotes from Members

We asked business professionals to review the solutions they use. Here are some excerpts of what they said:

Pros

"We have developed automation to speed up common repetitive processes."

"Apache Subversion is a scalable solution."

"AWS CodeCommit's user interface is nice, and it's easy for people to pick up."

"AWS CodeCommit has the usual version control features, and it integrates with AWS CodeGuru for code reviews."

"The customer service and support for AWS CodeCommit are excellent."

"The most valuable feature of AWS CodeCommit is that it acts as a code repository with code versioning and approval features similar to those found on GitHub."

"It helps us to install our code idea projects."

"AWS CodeCommit is simple and cheap."

"AWS CodeCommit is much easier to use than Bitbucket. It doesn't require any personal password or these things. We just need to put in our AWS account password and username."

"AWS CodeCommit is highly user-friendly."

More AWS CodeCommit pros

Cons

"The most valuable feature is CLI."

"The lack of latest features includes basic requirements such as pull requests, CI/CD platform integration, and artifact storage such as GitHub packages, which it does not offer."

"Apache Subversion should be easier to use."

"Migration in and out of CodeCommit should be improved."

"There is room for improvement in how AWS CodeCommit handles mass changes, like Fortran, which is designed to make these alterations in a friendly manner across AWS requirements."

"Although CodeCommit's user interface is good, it can be improved when compared to other version controls like GitHub, GitLab, or Bitbucket."

"Not really that much stands out. I am using CodeCommit since my customer asked me to use it. It is just an appliance, and GitHub and GitLab can do a better job."

"The solution could be more user-friendly and cheaper."

"When I compare code, AWS has a cap on the file size, and that size is pretty small compared to what GitHub and GitLab provide."

"There are some options in Bitbucket that are not available in AWS CodeCommit. For example, code reviewer. We can't add a code reviewer in AWS CodeCommit, and we can't fork the repository online. These are the two things that Bitbucket has, but the solution doesn't have. Also, Jira has a debugging option that AWS CodeCommit doesn't have. Another thing is that Bitbucket charges three dollars per month per user. Compared with AWS CodeCommit, that only charges one dollar per month. So, AWS CodeCommit is cheaper than Bitbucket. But it does not have enough features that Bitbucket has. Additionally, it will be good if you upload one video or documentation on how to use AWS CodeCommit for beginners. That will be more helpful. There you can add more details about pricing. There are not many details about pricing. Bitbucket has a table where they have mentioned everything in detail, like, what features for how much price, how much longer you can use and how many users can use."

"There is room for improvement in Insight Analytics."

More AWS CodeCommit cons

Pricing and Cost Advice

"The tool's price is good."

"The solution is expensive."

"As for pricing, you can add the table in detail. You can visit Bitbucket or refer to any other tools. There, you can see what is the difference between your pricing and other prices. You have only mentioned it in a single line. Other tools have been mentioned in a table format, like, how many users, premium, normal accounts, and other things."

"AWS CodeCommit is competitively priced against all the other competitors."

See which vendors are best for you

Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Version Control solutions are best for your needs.

See recommendations

865,384 professionals have used our research since 2012.

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews

No data available

Manufacturing Company

12%

Financial Services Firm

11%

Computer Software Company

Government

Company Size

By reviewers

Large Enterprise

Midsize Enterprise

Small Business

Questions from the Community

What do you like most about Apache Subversion?

We have developed automation to speed up common repetitive processes.

See all answers

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for Apache Subversion?

I am satisfied with the pricing and licensing cost of Apache Subversion; it is very low compared to other products.

See all answers

What needs improvement with Apache Subversion?

See all answers

What do you like most about AWS CodeCommit?

AWS CodeCommit is simple and cheap.

See all answers

What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for AWS CodeCommit?

AWS CodeCommit is actually one of the cost-effective AWS services. It follows a straightforward pricing model where you pay for users and storage. With around 40 to 50 developers, it ranges from $1...

See all answers

What needs improvement with AWS CodeCommit?

Understanding AWS CodeCommit was a hectic job for developers at first, while it was easier for the DevOps team. Even with access, they faced questions and difficulties navigating the service, indic...

See all answers

Comparisons

GitHub vs Apache Subversion

Compared 43% of the time

IBM Rational ClearCase vs Apache Subversion

Compared 34% of the time

Bitbucket vs Apache Subversion

Compared 23% of the time

More Apache Subversion Competitors

Bitbucket vs AWS CodeCommit

Compared 58% of the time

GitHub vs AWS CodeCommit

Compared 24% of the time

Bitbucket Server vs AWS CodeCommit

Compared 9% of the time

Atlassian SourceTree vs AWS CodeCommit

Compared 9% of the time

More AWS CodeCommit Competitors

Product Reports

Buyer's Guide

Version Control

August 2025

Download Apache Subversion product report

Buyer's Guide

AWS CodeCommit

August 2025

Download AWS CodeCommit product report

Also Known As

No data available

CodeCommit

Overview

The Apache LuceneTM project develops open-source search software, including Lucene Core (provides Java-based indexing and search technology), Solr (a high performance search server built using Lucene Core), Open Relevance Project (a subproject with the aim of collecting and distributing free materials for relevance testing and performance) and PyLucene (a Python port of the Core project)

Apache

AWS CodeCommit is a fully-managed source control service that hosts secure Git-based repositories. It makes it easy for teams to collaborate on code in a secure and highly scalable ecosystem. 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.

Amazon Web Services (AWS)

Sample Customers

IBM, General Electric, Amazon, HP, Facebook, Bank of America, American Express, AT&T, Nike, PayPal, Wells Fargo, Best Buy, Tesla Motors, Citi, The Home Depot

Edmunds, Gett, ClicksMob

Buyer's Guide

AWS CodeCommit vs. Apache Subversion

July 2025

Free Report: AWS CodeCommit vs. Apache Subversion

Find out what your peers are saying about AWS CodeCommit vs. Apache Subversion and other solutions. Updated: July 2025.

DOWNLOAD NOW

865,384 professionals have used our research since 2012.

See our AWS CodeCommit vs. Apache Subversion report.

See our list of best Version Control vendors.

We monitor all Version Control reviews to prevent fraudulent reviews and keep review quality high. We do not post reviews by company employees or direct competitors. We validate each review for authenticity via cross-reference with LinkedIn, and personal follow-up with the reviewer when necessary.