Bitbucket Server and GitHub are both version control services. GitHub has a stronger position due to its wide range of integrations and collaboration tools, making it a preferred choice despite Bitbucket Server's competitive pricing.
Features: Bitbucket Server integrates well with Jira, offers built-in CI/CD support, and provides advanced permission management. GitHub is notable for its extensive third-party integrations, robust global collaboration features, and active ecosystem of open-source projects.
Room for Improvement: Bitbucket Server could expand its third-party integrations and enhance global collaboration tools. Users might benefit from a more user-friendly UI and streamlined onboarding process. GitHub may improve its pricing flexibility for smaller teams, provide more built-in collaboration templates, and enhance offline access capabilities.
Ease of Deployment and Customer Service: Bitbucket Server offers on-premise deployment, giving control over data management and security, and provides personalized support for enterprise clients. GitHub offers seamless cloud-based deployment with comprehensive documentation, supported by community forums for assistance.
Pricing and ROI: Bitbucket Server is known for cost-effective setup with scalable enterprise options, potentially offering higher ROI in Atlassian environments. GitHub’s pricing, while possibly higher, is justified by its extensive features that enhance productivity and collaboration, making it valuable for expansive collaboration needs.
If they encounter problems beyond their scope, they contact the vendor directly.
The technical support from GitHub is generally good, and they communicate effectively.
Some forums help you get answers faster since you just type in your concern and see resolutions from other engineers.
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.
Bitbucket Server has been working efficiently for us so far, and I would rate it an eight or nine for scalability.
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.
If a skilled developer uses it, it is ten out of ten for stability.
It provides a reliable environment for code management.
GitHub is mostly stable, but there can be occasional hiccups.
While Bitbucket Server performs well, the improvement lies not in the tool itself yet in the discipline of the team using it.
Collaboration could be improved as the main aspect.
If they write incorrect code, it will notify me about it in the same dashboard.
I would like to see some AI functionality included in GitHub, similar to the features seen in GitLab, to enhance productivity.
When solving merge conflicts, it would be helpful to have tooltips within the actions to know what changes could happen next when resolving a conflict.
It's probably slightly expensive, and the cost depends on what you compare it with.
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.
Bitbucket Server excels as a versioning system, effectively managing branching and code integration.
The pull request feature in Bitbucket Server is necessary.
When working with the CI/CD pipeline and somebody is writing the workflow file, it would be best to include the AI feature so if they write incorrect code, it will notify me about it in the same dashboard, eliminating the need to use third-party tools to review the file.
I like how I can create different builds from different branches, which helps me as a QA to test certain features separately from the main application.
GitHub Actions for CI/CD implementation.
| Product | Market Share (%) |
|---|---|
| Bitbucket Server | 19.1% |
| GitHub | 8.2% |
| Other | 72.7% |
| Company Size | Count |
|---|---|
| Small Business | 9 |
| Midsize Enterprise | 4 |
| Large Enterprise | 15 |
| Company Size | Count |
|---|---|
| Small Business | 42 |
| Midsize Enterprise | 12 |
| Large Enterprise | 48 |
Bitbucket Server offers seamless integrations with tools like Jira and Jenkins, a user-friendly interface, and robust code collaboration features. It's known for excellent development support, scalability, and high availability, making it a preferred choice for many technical teams.
Bitbucket Server stands out due to its flexibility in workflows and ability to manage branching and code integration. It supports pull requests, private repositories, and is easy to manage on servers. Integration with CI/CD pipelines and traceability features enhances its functionality. Though there are areas requiring improvement such as remote site capabilities, granular access control, and support for large files, it remains a vital tool for code management, version control, and repository management in the CI/CD ecosystem, often utilized alongside Jenkins, Bamboo, and Jira. It supports software development processes such as task tracking and issue logging.
What are the key features of Bitbucket Server?In industries with strong development focus, Bitbucket Server plays a critical role in managing code versions and repositories. It supports agile planning and DevOps practices, enabling organizations to streamline code integration and task management efficiently. Companies benefit from its robust features, especially in complex software development environments.
GitHub is a web-based Git repository hosting service. It offers all of the distributed revision control and source code management (SCM) functionality of Git as well as adding its own features. Unlike Git, which is strictly a command-line tool, GitHub provides a Web-based graphical interface and desktop as well as mobile integration. It also provides access control and several collaboration features such as bug tracking, feature requests, task management, and wikis for every project.
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.
