We performed a comparison between Atlassian SourceTree 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."The initial setup is straightforward."
"The most valuable feature is the ability to fix a broken repository merge."
"The interface is very good and is easy to use. It tells you when you've committed, when you've uploaded, and gives you the differences."
"The solution's initial setup process is straightforward."
"I believe it's user-friendly for our developers, and it's effective in terms of traceability for tracking our actions."
"Integration of Bitbucket with JIRA & Bamboo is well done by Atlassian."
"The tool makes pushing codes and setting up CI/CD pipelines easy."
"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 most valuable feature of this solution is server management."
"The product’s most valuable features are private repositories and the ability to work as a proxy for implementing CI/CD pipelines."
"Our code is secure."
"The product's UI needs improvement."
"Its interface could be easy to understand for a programmer."
"I have had a food experience with Atlassian SourceTree but it might not be for everyone."
"For everyday use, I am more comfortable using the command line interface, rather than using SourceTree."
"Bitbucket Server has limited user support for its free version. It is expensive."
"Enhancing the real-time reflection of changes online is an area that could benefit from improvement."
"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."
"Some of the capabilities that I am looking for from a command line are not really available."
"The tasks on Bitbucket must be automatically integrated into Jira."
"We opted for the on-premises solution, and while it's quite expensive, I believe there's room for improvement in terms of pricing."
"The product interface consists of multiple features that are complicated to navigate for new users."
"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."
Atlassian SourceTree is ranked 6th in Version Control with 5 reviews while Bitbucket Server is ranked 2nd in Version Control with 17 reviews. Atlassian SourceTree is rated 7.2, while Bitbucket Server is rated 8.4. The top reviewer of Atlassian SourceTree writes "An easy-to-setup solution, but its documentation could be better for technical support". 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 ". Atlassian SourceTree is most compared with Git, GitHub, Bitbucket and AWS CodeCommit, whereas Bitbucket Server is most compared with Bitbucket, AWS CodeCommit and GitHub. See our Atlassian SourceTree 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.