Git Reviews

We use the solution for two purposes: first, we collaborate with the DevOps team, sharing our code; and second, we commit to a local repository, then push it to the distribution repository.

The most valuable feature is having access to the local country repository even if we have problems with distance access.

The UI can be more user-friendly.

I have been using the solution for two years.

I give the stability a ten out of ten.

I give the scalability a nine out of ten.

We have thousands of users.

We switched to Git because we had distance access issues with our previous solution.

I give the solution an eight out of ten.

I recommend the solution to other users. 

The most used case for it is managing code versions when working on a project with many developers. After we merge it, the dash is merged in the master dash. Next, when we merge its branch to replace it with the master and resolve conflicts, we collaborate to finish the project.

Code versioning, for example, we work in the branch and want to come back to this branch another time.Git is a very useful tool, helpful to collaborate with other members in the group to finish more rapidly our work.

About the configuration it is a little bit difficult, it can be improved.

I have been using the solution for the last two years.

It is a stable solution. Never faced any bugs or glitches. I rate the stability of the solution an eight out of ten.

It is not a very scalable solution. It is not a good experience to manage large scalable products. I have moderate experience in managing large projects on Git. One thousand users are using the solution regularly. I rate the scalability of the solution a seven out of ten.

The initial setup of Git can be difficult but once you master the solution it is a useful tool and works on many difficulties by rapidly completing the task.

I advice everyone to learn about Git as it is a very useful solution and help in working on projects more rapidly which otherwise would have taken time. I rate the overall solution an eight out of ten.

I use the solution for process control and issue management.

The product protects our data. The solution allows us to have both public and private repositories. The product is integrated with other solutions.

The solution could be more user-friendly. Sometimes, I feel lost while using the dashboard.

I have been using the solution since 2016.

I rate the solution’s stability a nine out of ten.

Less than ten people are using the product in our organization.

The initial setup is not complex.

The deployment can be done in-house. We need one administrator and one developer to maintain and deploy the solution.

The product is mostly used by developers and DevOps teams. Bitbucket is more user-friendly than GitHub. If we have a GitHub account, we can invite users. People wanting to use the product should use the free version and understand the features well before buying the licensed version. Overall, I rate the solution a nine out of ten.

Git is used for version control.

Our extensive IT department collaborates on various projects, utilizing Git to manage versions effectively. One significant advantage is the ability to maintain multiple versions of the same code, even when offline. This is particularly beneficial in scenarios where internet connectivity is not available, enabling individuals to work on their code seamlessly. Ultimately, this is a crucial benefit for our team's productivity and market competitiveness.

All of the features in Git are useful.

The solution could improve by having more customization.

I have been using Git for a few years.

The stability is good.

I rate the stability of Git a ten out of ten.

We have approximately 500 people using the solution.

The solution is scalable.

I have not used the support.

I have used solutions prior to Git.

The setup of Git is straightforward. The time it takes to set up depends on the size of the project.

When we're doing things manually, but now we use automation tools. When there is a request made it is automated and deployed in the project.

We did the implementation in-house. We have a team that handles the implementation.

A few people in each team have to do the maintenance of the solution.

I would recommend people start using Git. Users can work on an offline copy without internet connectivity and later sync their changes once online. This process is effortless and speedy. Additionally, it is highly secure. After setting up an Azure account, integration with other tools is possible, allowing for continuous integration and deployment.

I rate Git out of ten.

We use Git for version control for programs. 

To have programming projects and keeping track of the copays is always it's always nice to have to be able to reverse changes if they don't work.

I am doing my CV and I am also tracking it with GIt.

I believe it is beneficial to maintain a detailed log or history of who did what to a project and which user committed to the change.

The program is run from your shell and I am comfortable with that.

You have Git Lab as a platform, which is just Git with a web interface. I believe that is already well integrated.

More security is always welcome in my opinion.

I have been working with Git for two years. I use it occasionally.

I am working with the most recent version.

I would rate the stability of Git a ten out of ten.

In my opinion, Git is a scalable solution.

It is used for Linux, which I believe is the largest open-source project we have running right now.

I don't believe they offer technical support.

I have used Confluence and Jira from Atlassian.

The initial setup is straightforward. You initialize the repo in your code base, and you start committing changes.

It doesn't take very long to deploy it, a few seconds. It's a single connection.

It can be deployed by anyone who is using it.

Git is completely free.

I would definitely recommend using Git.

My advice to others is that it is a good idea to read the manual.

I would rate Git a ten out of ten.

We are using Git for development. We are cloning the code, pushing code, and raising pull requests. We use it for the typical Git workflow for development.

The solution has improved our company because I no longer have to copy the code on my own and keep it in a safe folder. This solution is organized and it's very useful in a team.

The most valuable feature of Git is the ease of tracking in time what the snapshot of the code was at a particular moment. The versioning is good.

Git could improve the merge conflicts. 

In a future release, the user interface should be easier to use and more intuitive.

I have been using Git for approximately three years.

Git is highly stable.

I have not used the support from Git.

I have not used a similar tool prior to Git.

There is only an online deployment of Git and it belongs to Microsoft.

We have received a return on investment using this solution.

There are some extra costs to Git, but it depends on your use case.

My advice to others is Git is the industry standard for source code versioning and my recommendation for them is to learn it and use it.

I rate Git a nine out of ten.

The features I am most impressed by is the automation, and when we do the pull requests, everything gets indicated on there in terms of the deployment steps and full-on automated deployment. We have found that the standard level for DevOps in terms of automated deployment is 30 minutes. So we actually hit that in 30 minutes, which was great.

I would like to see an improvement in the way the product owner can review changes and so forth. But I believe there are licensing costs related to that. It would be better to keep everything simple with one standard license fee.  

There wasn't any instability at all because when we did our first automation deployment, we hit 100% with zero bugs introduced. That was really, really good. I just think we must get the automated testing right. We don't have that many seasoned automated tests and therefore we did all the full-on regression testing that was needed, went into production and had zero defects.

We have about 40 to 50 users and 12 testers, and so far it has been very scalable. We plan to increase our usage in the future.

We have monitors in place for our usual business so if anything goes down, there is an immediate response to look at that from a proactive perspective to see what is affected. In terms of from a testing perspective, through change, it is a database issue or anything like that. In terms of support, we have two sections of support. One for terms of DevOps where we have a operations person responsible for this. And when we put the software into production, we have someone on standby to ensure that everything is in perfect working condition. 

There are other options in the greater part of our environments. But since we were working on Microsoft from the start, it just was easier to continue that way. It was a new department being established and we wanted to start off that way, rather than moving from an old state to a new state. It takes longer and the change management is greater.

Our technical team will be able to tell you exactly, but I believe they found some problems around the installation and so forth. I do know that it took them a while to actually get the automated deployment right before they could actually execute it. Perhaps the developers can make it easier in terms of getting readiness for automation deployment. It was quite complex and it took us about a day and a half. However, if you do a manual deployment, it doesn't take that long.

My advice to others would be to implement it correctly and do whatever your unit test brings back in terms of an approach. Fix that first and then start with your coding. That is how you ensure quality.

I would say that you should start afresh. Instead of trying the squad branching, do the release branching, and work from there. Don't be wary of actually starting on DevOps. Sometimes people are wary of the unknown but it adds a lot of value if you go with the CDCI approach. 

It is a great product and my rating is eight out of ten.

Git is used to develop software.

Git's learning curve is shallow, making the solution easy to use after a few tutorials.

I would like more documentation.

I have been using Git for nine months.

Git is stable.

Git is scalable.

I am satisfied with the technical support.

The more we do it, the easier the setup becomes, but the first few times were not easy. At most, it takes a couple of days to implement. 

I rate Git an eight out of ten.