Try our new research platform with insights from 80,000+ expert users

Apache Subversion vs GitHub comparison

 

Comparison Buyer's Guide

Executive SummaryUpdated on Jul 13, 2025

Review summaries and opinions

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

ROI

Sentiment score
5.0
Apache Subversion offers a cost-free solution for small teams but lacks ROI compared to Bitbucket's CI/CD integrations.
Sentiment score
5.0
GitHub provides efficient code management, cost benefits, secure code, and organizational advantages, enhancing market delivery and user experience.
 

Customer Service

Sentiment score
6.8
Apache Subversion users often rely on community support and online resources, rating direct support between 5 to 8 out of 10.
Sentiment score
6.5
Users primarily rely on community resources for support, but some desire quicker access to GitHub's technical support.
I have not used GitHub's technical support extensively because there are many resources and a robust knowledge base available due to the large user community.
Some forums help you get answers faster since you just type in your concern and see resolutions from other engineers.
The technical support from GitHub is generally good, and they communicate effectively.
 

Scalability Issues

Sentiment score
5.5
Apache Subversion is scalable, supporting multiple instances and accommodating 10-20 users per instance, and is well-rated for scalability.
Sentiment score
7.7
GitHub efficiently supports global teams with scalable, cloud-based infrastructure, ensuring performance and stability for diverse user and project sizes.
We have never had a problem with scalability, so I would rate it at least eight to nine.
GitHub is more scalable than on-prem solutions, allowing for cloud-based scaling which is beneficial for processing large workloads efficiently.
 

Stability Issues

Sentiment score
4.5
Feedback on Apache Subversion's stability is mixed, with ratings ranging from six to eight out of ten.
Sentiment score
8.7
GitHub is stable, supports over 1,000 users effectively, with transparency and reliable updates appreciated, despite minor issues.
It provides a reliable environment for code management.
If a skilled developer uses it, it is ten out of ten for stability.
GitHub is mostly stable, but there can be occasional hiccups.
 

Room For Improvement

Apache Subversion users seek improved merging, ease of use, and features like CI/CD integration and customized configurations akin to GitHub.
GitHub needs improved security, integration, AI enhancements, UI/UX, search, docs, automation, and support for better user experience.
Sometimes we do not get the exact solution, and the suggested solution does not work, so GitHub could improve in that area.
There are still areas for improvement with GitHub Actions and their deployment workflows, as they have made significant progress but are not yet polished.
One area for improvement in GitHub could be integration with other tools, such as test management or project management tools.
 

Setup Cost

Apache Subversion is valued by enterprises for being open-source, cost-effective, and providing quality without licensing fees.
GitHub provides cost-effective subscription options with a free basic version, ideal for public use, and competitive pricing for enterprises.
The pricing of GitHub depends on the choice of solutions, such as building one's own GitHub Runners to save money or using GitHub's Runners with extra costs.
Normally, GitHub is not expensive, but it would be welcome if it reduces costs for developing countries.
The pricing of GitHub is reasonable, with the cost being around seven dollars per user per month for private repositories.
 

Valuable Features

Apache Subversion provides centralized version control, easy collaboration, and integration capabilities, enhancing code management and team productivity.
GitHub offers robust community support, security, version control, integration with DevOps tools, and flexibility for distributed teams.
GitHub Actions for CI/CD implementation.
For branching, it works well, especially in an agile environment.
GitHub Actions allow for creating multiple jobs that run in different stages such as build, test, and deploy, which enable better visibility and control over the deployment pipeline.
 

Categories and Ranking

Apache Subversion
Ranking in Version Control
10th
Average Rating
7.0
Reviews Sentiment
5.5
Number of Reviews
5
Ranking in other categories
No ranking in other categories
GitHub
Ranking in Version Control
3rd
Average Rating
8.8
Reviews Sentiment
7.2
Number of Reviews
94
Ranking in other categories
Application Security Tools (6th)
 

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 GitHub is 7.6%, up from 6.0% compared to the previous year. It is calculated based on PeerSpot user engagement data.
Version Control
 

Featured Reviews

Vijay Londhe - PeerSpot reviewer
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.
Kamalanadha Reddy - PeerSpot reviewer
Improved deployment pipeline visibility with generally good support
My primary use case involves working with GitHub for code management. I have extensive experience using it for various tasks, such as creating repositories, managing pull requests, and utilizing GitHub Actions for automating workflows GitHub contributes to efficient project management by…
report
Use our free recommendation engine to learn which Version Control solutions are best for your needs.
865,164 professionals have used our research since 2012.
 

Top Industries

By visitors reading reviews
No data available
Computer Software Company
11%
Financial Services Firm
11%
Manufacturing Company
9%
Comms Service Provider
7%
 

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.
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.
What needs improvement with Apache Subversion?
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 w...
What do you like most about GitHub?
The control is the most valuable feature as developers can work on a single code.
What is your experience regarding pricing and costs for GitHub?
I am not aware about the pricing, so I will not be able to give feedback.
What needs improvement with GitHub?
Sometimes we do not get the exact solution, and the suggested solution does not work, so GitHub could improve in that area. We have used GitHub mainly for the code generation part. That is the only...
 

Comparisons

 

Overview

 

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
Dominion Enterprises, NASA, Braintree, SAP, CyberAgent
Find out what your peers are saying about Apache Subversion vs. GitHub and other solutions. Updated: July 2025.
865,164 professionals have used our research since 2012.