CentraSite vs SwaggerHub comparison

"The governance is powerful, and you can look up services very easily, which may reduce some development cycle time."

"SwaggerHub is helping with team collaboration, as all the people now know the link, they just go there and get the information they need, and it is really a documentation tool for sharing documentation information about the API we support."

"I rate the solution's stability a ten out of ten."

"Normally, they publish their APIs on SwaggerHub for seamless integration with SmartBear and ReadyAPI, which allows us to perform detailed end-to-end automation testing."

"One of the best features of SwaggerHub is how it allows me to create APIs and control the evolution of APIs within an organization."

"SwaggerHub has significantly improved how my organization designs, documents, and manages APIs, centralizing API management so that all API definitions are stored in one location, which makes it easy for stakeholders, developers, QA, DevOps, and products to access the latest version."

"The product's initial setup phase was easy and not at all difficult."

"It is quite a useful tool. It is quite good with the validation of the spec. It works quite well in terms of errors and conformity to the OpenAPI standard. It is better than Visual Studio Code in terms of editing."

"The scalability is endless."

"The setup is mild. It's not so simple and not very difficult. You can make it happen with some configuration, but it's not easy for non-professional people."

"The scalability aspect of SwaggerHub can be improved. It becomes a bit unreliable when the load is increased and isn't up to par with expectations for scalability."

"One of the most difficult things about SwaggerHub is the user interface and its usability, as it can feel quite complex and require too many clicks for simple actions."

"Some areas of SwaggerHub that could be improved include the interface between the code editor and the visual editor, the integration with private APIs, which currently requires an upgraded account."

"More integration and usability with the cloud microservices would be nice."

"At some point, we were missing some tagging of the APIs, and we could not do that."

"The review process should be improved. There seem to be some gaps, at least for us, for the editing part because we would like to have a full request review mechanism. They support some comments, but it is really hard to manage those comments. We would like to use the full request. Therefore, we are now looking to integrate with repositories. It has integration with Bitbucket and GitHub, but we have some internal constraints, and we need to move some of the repositories to GitHub. Our source code is on-premise in Bitbucket, and it was a bit of a problem for us to integrate. Now we are transitioning our repositories to GitHub, and hopefully, we can enable the integration. This will probably solve the problem with the review and approval. Its customization should also be improved. There are limitations around the support for the developer portal. There should be more customization options for the website that you can use as a developer portal. Currently, it has only Swagger UI with minimal customization. You cannot actually add additional pages and documentation for explaining concepts and general things. That's why we have started to look around to see what other tools are doing. They should also allow tagging on the API. We would like to add some tagging on the API to reflect certain things. Currently, any metadata that you would like to have has to be a part of the spec. You cannot do anything else. It should also have support for Open API 3.1, which was released at the beginning of the year. It would be great to be able to switch to that."

"We have to use additional tools to test APIs."

"It could be more intuitive compared to one of its competitors."

"The tool is cheap."

"It has a yearly subscription, but I am not sure."