We performed a comparison between Apache Subversion and Bitbucket Server based on real PeerSpot user reviews.
Find out in this report how the two Version Control solutions compare in terms of features, pricing, service and support, easy of deployment, and ROI."Apache Subversion is a scalable solution."
"We have developed automation to speed up common repetitive processes."
"I believe it's user-friendly for our developers, and it's effective in terms of traceability for tracking our actions."
"The product is easy to maintain."
"The most valuable feature of this solution is server management."
"Integration of Bitbucket with JIRA & Bamboo is well done by Atlassian."
"The most valuable feature of the Bitbucket Server is its ease of management. The solution is easy to manage once we migrate and set up the data. The solution offers a fast code push feature."
"Bitbucket Server is easy to use. You can use other applications to access it, or you can use it to access the internet. You can use solutions, such as Sourcetree, which is free, and put it on your development system and use it to do the check-in, checkouts, and those type of operations. It is nice, but some other developers may agree."
"Bitbucket Server supports code collaboration by providing commands developers can use to check in code. Through comments, developers can specify the purpose of the code check-in. Additionally, Bitbucket allows tagging of code for releases."
"The tool makes pushing codes and setting up CI/CD pipelines easy."
"The most valuable feature is CLI."
"Apache Subversion should be easier to use."
"Enhancing the real-time reflection of changes online is an area that could benefit from improvement."
"We opted for the on-premises solution, and while it's quite expensive, I believe there's room for improvement in terms of pricing."
"It would have been better to use Bitbucket Server if it had something similar to the concept called GitHub Actions since it allows GitHub to provide seamless integration of CI/CD pipelines."
"Bitbucket Server has limited user support for its free version. It is expensive."
"Some of the capabilities that I am looking for from a command line are not really available."
"At the moment, there are not many details on how to proceed with the troubleshooting if one of the users faces an issue with the product."
"The tasks on Bitbucket must be automatically integrated into Jira."
"The response time of the product's support team may not be good enough to meet the expectations of users, making it an area where improvements are required."
Apache Subversion is ranked 9th in Version Control with 4 reviews while Bitbucket Server is ranked 2nd in Version Control with 18 reviews. Apache Subversion is rated 7.2, while Bitbucket Server is rated 8.4. The top reviewer of Apache Subversion writes "Centralized repository, but the stability could improve". On the other hand, the top reviewer of Bitbucket Server writes "An easy to use solution that works as a code repository for developers and helps them merge changes ". Apache Subversion is most compared with IBM Rational ClearCase, whereas Bitbucket Server is most compared with Bitbucket, Atlassian SourceTree, AWS CodeCommit and GitHub. See our Apache Subversion vs. Bitbucket Server 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.