GitHub CoPilot Reviews

Today, if you're aware of the CI/CD requirements, then it's fine. Unless you know how to create the pipeline, it would be tough. The one I'm using is already set. So I can implement it immediately. If there is a deviation from that, then it will be a little tough, I would need to Google to find the solution. I can implement it.

When you're using it, it's automatically deployed. In a normal application, it used to provide a single application. In this proprietary thing, it is just now it used to provide in the scripting tag, you need to provide Spring Boot.run, and that server code. So that unit is forwarded. In Copilot, you need to mention which nodes you are going to configure. So you need to provide all the port numbers and then deploy there. It will automatically deploy everywhere.

The deployment is easier when you're handling multiple deployments. So, I don't need to node application unit for node, update, and everything everywhere. But it's also in the engine we can do there. 

Once you set up everything, it is automatically handled. But once the setup is done, it's done.

GitHub Copilot code suggestion capabilities: It's always good. When you're doing any deployment, the suggestions are always welcome. You don't need to remember everything. You can pick from the solutions provided.

One thing I noticed is that normally, in CI/CD pipelines, we put: 

• the Jenkins path, 
• the Git repository paths, and 
• the number of reports we are going to deploy.

If we had an automatic system, an automatic page to do all these things, it would be easier. Not a configuration, but a page. If you have that kind of page, then Copilot can help all the developers. This is my individual preference. It can be there, it may not be. Maybe I'm not able to explore those issues, but that is one thing I noticed.

Currently, we need to map everything. We need to provide the Git card and where we need to deploy. If it is pre-prod, stage, or production, we need to map it separately. If we had some kind of program and could take it from the application of properties file, it would have been great. We configure everything in separate files. 

Even for development, staging, and production environments, we need to make separate files for each. If you have some mechanics to automate that, it would be great. It's for the entire system. Their system is like that. You need to prepare separately for every manage. So if you have one utility to make all those alternates, it would have been great. A UI would enhance the developer experience and streamline the CI/CD process.

You need to configure it separately for each environment. If everything is in a dropdown, it could be directly included. It will automatically connect to your dedicated agent. But it is okay. As of now, it's working fine. It's just manually maintaining that data. It worked fine. No issues. That is the only suggestion I have.

TL;DR:

For different environments, like production, stage, and development, if we can have a single point, like one, two, or three instead of opening for each, that feature would be helpful. We have numbers for certain regions, but again, the developer and the team should remember which number is for dev, stage, and prod. That could be easier for maintenance. 

The administrator doing the CI/CD pipeline should remember that number. It can be easier for any AI tool to do that. Instead of putting the phase in the configuration, if you put in a AI tool, it is easier for the system to manage.

I have been using it for three months. 

It's stable. 

It's scalable.

In the last team that we had around 13 members, everyone never faced any issues when using Git merge and Git commit. You have a separate Git repository, and you just need to know how to use it. The only thing is, our case of sessions should be organized, and the resources should be proper.

You want to see what everything the account does. I do everything with a command prompt, not using any Git GUI. You'll get the GUI application for your commit and such. It's fine.  

Deployment time: If the database scripting and the data center information are ready, then it will take one or two hours. It's a server configuration. Two to three hours of work.

Deployment resources: I can also do it. It doesn't require multiple people. If the software is ready and everything is fine, then only one person can do everything. That is what a full-stack developer means. If you are a full-stack developer, it means you can handle all the data-related tasks and services. I'm a full-stack developer, so I'm ready to do that. I should have the capability to do everything on the website.

We have a separate team to do that. They will do the things for us. From my side, I just raise a ticket in Jira support, and then they will take the ticket and implement it. The installation and configuration is a separate process because in each organization, they have separate monitoring systems.  

There's a separate team to make those things happen for me.

Overall, I would rate the solution a nine out of ten. The only suggestion is to enhance Copilot's ability to assist developers with infrastructure as code tasks.

Like, while using CI/CD pipeline, when I use YAML files, so it could just support the port number. That will improve the feature. But the developer should be aware of the feature.

I am evaluating the tool to understand how useful it is for development. I'm evaluating how smart it is.

The solution makes our work easier. If we use a particular coding style, the solution can identify our coding style. The solution increases coding efficiency. It tries to judge our coding and logging style and imitates it. It automatically suggests copy-paste functions. It saves us time.

If we try to do something that involves two to three files and functions, the tool gets confused. It gives us advice that does not work. The suggestions are not well evaluated. We need to put more effort into debugging. The tool miserably fails when multiple files are involved. The tool must improve its ability to work with multiple files.

The first suggestion provided by the product must work. Whenever the product provides a suggestion, it must validate it. It will be helpful for the users. If the first suggestion is good, we can use it. If the first suggestion is wrong, the product will not solve the problem even if we ask it multiple times.

I have been using the solution for the last one and a half months.

The tool is stable. It gives us an answer, whether accurate or not.

I rate the product’s scalability a five out of ten. It does not work well in complex coding scenarios.

The initial setup is easy. I am using the latest enterprise version.

The solution is costly. It is not reasonably priced.

I have also used ChatGPT. GitHub CoPilot is built into coding. If we are working on coding, GitHub CoPilot is a better choice. ChatGPT is a better choice if we want to understand the concepts.

Overall, I rate the solution a five out of ten.

GitHub CoPilot helps its users summarize documents. GitHub CoPilot has an AI capability that allows it to give its users a summary of documents that it has received from them. GitHub CoPilot also provides meeting summaries and suggestions on how and when you are supposed to send reports or emails. GitHub CoPilot establishes a total baseline of its users' activities so that it can later recommend to its users how to structure their day.

GitHub CoPilot's stability is an area of concern where improvements are required.

I have been using GitHub CoPilot for three or four months. I have experience with the preview version of the product. Though I am not sure about it, I think that GitHub CoPilot is not yet released in the market.

Stability-wise, I rate the solution a seven out of ten.

I will not be able to comment on the scalability part of the solution since my company has not undertaken a full-fledged deployment process across our organization's users.

All the people in my company use GitHub CoPilot in one form or the other.

The product's initial setup is straightforward because it's pushed through the updates. The product's updates are allowed automatically, so the setup process is not something one needs to get involved in deeply.

The solution can deployed in less than a minute since it is done through the automatic updates provided by GitHub.

No technical people are required to take care of the deployment and maintenance of the solution since it gets automatically pushed as an update from GitHub CoPilot.

The solution's deployment part was managed with the help of one of our company's in-house teams.

GitHub CoPilot comes readily available for enterprise customers, so it's a free add-on if you already have GitHub's enterprise license.

I recommend the solution to those who plan to use it.

As it is a new product in the market, I rate the overall tool an eight to nine out of ten.

Apart from being a DevOps and solution architect, I am also a data analyst. I use GitHub CoPilot when I want to do some analysis and get some exact technical details. I don't have time to always go to my browser and figure out how to implement something, so once I am at work and I have the initial setup done already, I really know what to do and how to go about it. The product is simple to work on since if I have to work on a project, I can do some analysis before developing infographics, making it a really efficient product.

Some of the suggestions provided by GitHub CoPilot are not accurate, making it an area of concern where improvements are required.

I have been using GitHub CoPilot for two years. I use the solution's latest version. I am a customer of GitHub.

Stability-wise, I rate the solution an eight out of ten.

The stability issues in GitHub CoPilot are the same as the ones in GitHub Codespaces. Even with a high-speed internet connection, the product hangs and has some glitches.

Scalability-wise, I rate the solution an eight out of ten since the product's scalability still has a lot of room for improvement.

I haven't contacted the technical support team of GitHub CoPilot since if I face any stability-related issues with the product, I stop or disable it and then enable it, after which it starts working again.

The initial setup of the product is easy.

For deployment, you just need to log in to your GitHub account through your ID, after which GitHub Codespaces automatically connect to GitHub CoPilot to your GitHub account.

The solution is deployed on the cloud.

GitHub CoPilot's deployment process did not take a long time.GitHub CoPilot is a service that is not complex. The deployment process was very fast.

The product offers a free version and a paid version. Whether to choose the product's free version or paid version depends on the size of the company where it will be used. If your company size is going to increase and many people plan to use the product, then GitHub will charge you a certain amount. The account on GitHub I use is free for a year, after which I need to start paying if I want to use the solution. In my company, for some of the users, I have seen that certain payments need to be made to GitHub CoPilot.

Before using GitHub CoPilot, you need to consider what you are working on so that you don't miss what you are trying to achieve. When you are working on professional projects or very important projects for which, it may not be a good idea to use GitHub CoPilot. You should have good knowledge of what you are doing.

I rate the overall product an eight out of ten.

I use the solution in my company for information about the user story. It also helps to know how many tests or flows we need to test.

The most valuable skill and characteristic of GitHub CoPilot is that you can find any information in seconds.

The technology offered by the product in the retail industry and banking processes has certain shortcomings, making them areas that can be improved.

I have been using GitHub CoPilot for five months.

It is a scalable solution. Scalability-wise, I rate the solution a seven out of ten.

I think the use, setup, or maybe how we can use the tool depends on how much of your tasks can be done with it. For example, if you can use the tool every day for less than an hour, you can improve your tasks and skills with the tool on a daily basis. In my case, for example, I use Postman every day so I can improve my job and my tasks every day.

I rate the technical support a nine out of ten.

Positive

I have experience with ChatGPT and Vertex AI from Google. I think they are all the same tools coming from different providers. The principal difference between all the tools is the updates. Vertex AI has information from the last year, but GitHub CoPilot may have information for the current year. It all depends on how many updates one can have on a product.

The product's initial setup phase is easy.

The solution can be deployed in a matter of minutes.

The tool saves 25 percent of the time for me.

Speaking about the tool's ability to handle complex coding tasks compared to simpler ones, I would say that you can take care of the flows in Postman and translate them using Selenium or Python, and you can add it to your automation test.

GitHub CoPilot has adapted to the specific languages and frameworks I use, and it offers great assistance. I can say this because if I have one question, I can go to GitHub CoPilot to ask my question, and I find the information I need. I think GitHub Copilot is of great assistance as it can add more information about your work, your job, your task, and your flows, and you can find better answers and better examples day by day.

I rate the tool a nine out of ten.

We use the tool for code snippets that we integrate into our solutions. 

GitHub CoPilot helps us auto-complete code. The tool's context awareness benefits our projects because it identifies the context in which we are working and automatically proposes solutions that we use. 

The most important factor is that we need less time for design. We can cover solutions more quickly; our updates will be within days, not months, as before.

The tool needs to focus on integration, as it is the most important aspect. I would like to see some pre-designed modules included in my projects.

I have been using the tool for a month. 

I rate the solution's stability a nine out of ten. It is good and promising. 

GitHub CoPilot's scalability is quite satisfactory. I rate it a ten out of ten. My company has two users. 

We use support from Microsoft's online documentation and resources. We don't need to contact human support.

GitHub CoPilot's deployment is straightforward. It is used as a tool for assistance rather than being deployed within our projects.

We have a demo license. Once we understand what we'll do, we'll start with a paid license.

We are still in the planning phase. We have attended some seminars by Microsoft to understand our needs better. Once we have a clear plan and strategy, we will discuss whether we need professional help. 

My advice for people who want to start using it is to understand how it works and to find uses for the platform. This means focusing on how to develop their processes, not traditionally, but by utilizing these AI tools.

I rate the overall solution a ten out of ten. 

I use the solution in my company since, as a data engineer, I also work with Python. For writing a code or for reviewing the code, I'm using code on it.

The most valuable features of the solution stem from the fact that it gives you suggestions when you start typing.

I have not used the product much to be able to comment on what needs improvement in it. With the passage of time, I believe that there will be improvements in its prompt response, like ChatGPT, considering that GitHub will get more data. With time, the product will mature.

The product's price is an area of concern where improvements are required. ChatGPT is free, and people would rather prefer it over GitHub CoPilot.

Considering the way GitHub CoPilot works, it can improve its connection with technologies like SQL. Right now, I can't write an AWS Glue job in GitHub CoPilot. In the future, if the tool can improve and include multiple technologies and languages, I see that they have a scope to offer better scalability.

I have been using GitHub CoPilot for less than a month. I am just a consumer of the tool.

Sometimes, when the product doesn't function properly because of some network issue, I prefer to use ChatGPT. In ChatGPT, you can ask any general question.

Scalability-wise, I rate the solution a seven out of ten.

Before GitHub CoPilot, I worked on ChatGPT, so I had to give the prompt to get what I wanted. ChatGPT is also a very helpful tool.

I currently work with GitHub CoPilot and ChatGPT.

ChatGPT gives the wrong output at times, after which you need to correct it. GitHub CoPilot gives correct codes since it always works on the existing codes in GitHub. GitHub CoPilot gives a correct output.

The product's initial setup phase is easy, but sometimes, if your company has firewall issues, it gives errors.

There is a need to pay around 10 USD to be able to use the solution.

I am planning to use this AWS Bedrock and another tool from AWS for its AI-based features. I have not decided on the tool I plan to use. I want to learn and see what AWS is doing with its products.

GitHub CoPilot improved my code efficiency by helping me save time. The tool gives me ready-made codes, which I review and then implement.

Speaking about GitHub CoPilot's ability in terms of context and syntax suggestions, the tool is helpful.

The product is easy to integrate.

I recommend the product to developers who plan to use it. It is not a free tool forever, meaning it is only free for a month.

I rate the tool a six to seven out of ten.

The product's most valuable feature is vulnerability management features.

GitHub CoPilot's alerting features need improvement.

We have been using GitHub CoPilot for 3 years.

The product has high stability.

We haven't encountered scalability issues as we are still in the process of onboarding more applications. However, it might be beneficial once we transition to the cloud.

Around 50 developers from our organization use GitHub CoPilot daily. However, most developers still use Azure DevOps.

We used Azure DevOps. We decided to switch to CoPilot for advanced security features.

The initial setup is easy. It takes a few days to complete. I rate the process a 9 out of 10.

Our in-house team of developers implemented the platform. At the moment, a team of 30 developers is maintaining it.

GitHub CoPilot has greatly enhanced coding efficiency for new projects, particularly through its advanced security features.

The platform offers a comprehensive package, including firewall capabilities. You don't need to download additional applications or purchase separate solutions for security testing and vulnerability management.

I rate it a 9 out of 10.

For example, I participate in a radio show on IT topics. I use OpenAI to prepare the script I will use in the program. So, I need some queries and questions or topics for discussion. I use OpenAI to create AI business scripts tailored to how I want to address the topics. I have used OpenAI to improve my English skills. For example, I have asked for recommendations to enhance this text.

I have used OpenAI to learn how to engage with my clients, daughters, and nephews. For example, they gave me a challenge where we discussed a topic and started asking OpenAI questions to see what responses it generated. On the professional side, I have primarily used it for improving emails, resumes, or other situations. Also, in coding, I remember using it when encountering issues implementing code for an application. I usually start by asking OpenAI before turning to Google or other platforms because it helps me identify the problem faster in specific situations.

In certain instances, OpenAI didn't respond in the expected way. It was in the Power Automate. The responses were more general and didn't address the specific point. There were significant limitations. Typically, the queries I've used it for are relatively small in scope.

I prefer OpenAI over Copilot, which is integrated with coding tools like GitHub, because Copilot seems difficult to use. Copilot's responses are different from what I need to understand the problem. OpenAI has helped me a lot. It hasn't provided direct solutions, but it aids in pinpointing the issue.

Initially, OpenAI is free, but you'll need to pay for it later.

Overall, I rate the solution a 9 out of 10.

I'm using GitHub Copilot as a plugin for IntelliJ IDE. Specifically, I'm using the Community Edition of IntelliJ, not the commercial version. However, our organization provides us with a commercial license for GitHub Copilot.

I can upload code snippets or class files and ask for solutions to improve them, which works well. It's a great productivity tool that saves me time searching websites. While there are alternatives like ChatGPT and other AI tools, the advantage of the tool is that it is built into the IDE.

One drawback is that the solution sometimes suggests unwanted code, especially if I accidentally press the tab. This doesn't happen often. Sometimes it seems to understand my code, but other times it doesn't. This inconsistency is confusing.

I suggest adding a feature to write code directly in the IDE from chat responses instead of copying and pasting. GitHub Copilot can generate code based on method comments in the IDE, but chat responses require manual copying. A feature flag to allow direct writing from chat to IDE would streamline the process.

The product should also reduce its price so that it can improve the community engagement. 

I have been using the product for three months. 

As for performance and usage, I've only encountered connectivity issues once or twice. It responds well about 99 percent of the time. 

Regarding stability, there have been a couple of instances where the chat plugin got stuck. However, I don't see this as a major concern. It might improve over time, but it's not a significant issue.

The tool's deployment is mostly straightforward. The plugin installation is simple. However, there's one confusing part during the login process. When you log into your GitHub Copilot account, it redirects you to a website that asks for a device ID or something similar. I can't remember exactly what it asks for, but this ID is shown in the IDE popup. It's a bit confusing and takes a few minutes to understand this workflow. It would be helpful if they added a message saying you can find the device ID in your IDE popup. Adding more instructions to that screen could improve the login flow since it redirects you to a website to log in.

The ROI decreases if questions are too long. If it automatically accessed the content or context, questions could be asked easily with a few lines of code or statements. Currently, providing all details takes a long time, reducing productivity. Since it resides in the IDE, it should ideally have access to the codebase and know more about the context where questions are asked rather than starting from scratch.

Each user needs their license, whether it's a big team or a small team.

It's a helpful tool, but you need strong programming knowledge to use it effectively. If you don't understand Java or your objectives, GitHub Copilot might give wrong answers.

It is good at what it's designed for when handling complex coding scenarios or languages. However, there are limitations. The main issue is similar to other AI agents - requiring skilful prompting to get relevant answers. If GitHub Copilot had access to the entire codebase we're working on, it could provide more relevant and productive outcomes. But I'm not sure how security and privacy aspects would be handled in that situation.

The tool tends to give atomic answers rather than addressing very complex, multi-class-spanning questions. If it had access to more context, it might be able to provide better answers for complex scenarios involving multiple classes or large code structures.

I rate the overall solution an eight out of ten. I can recommend it, given it's affordable, because there are many free alternatives. They may need to introduce a community edition or similar option to compete and remain relevant.