GitHub Reviews

Mainly, I implement my automation test or automation scripts on GitHub, and I try to set it up and push it. Whenever the dev team pushes or makes any deployment, I look for it in GitHub to verify everything is there. Then, I test those features that they deployed.

I appreciate saving from Visual Studio Code that implements changes directly on GitHub. It's nice. When you push changes, they are there. For branching, it works well, especially in an agile environment. 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.

One thing GitHub could do is probably the same thing as what Sourcetree does. 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 would be nice to have a preview so you are not surprised by what happens after trying to resolve conflicts.

I would say I have been using it for about a year now.

I would give stability an eight out of ten. I am happy about it.

I'd give scalability an eight out of ten.

Some forums help you get answers faster since you just type in your concern and see resolutions from other engineers. However, professional help from GitHub would be nice to have. I'd like a quick customer support option.

I've only tried Sourcetree and Bitbucket before. There's not much difference. So far, it's mainly GitHub for me.

The initial setup is simple enough.

The pricing is average. In the middle.

I've tried Bitbucket and Sourcetree.

I can recommend GitHub for sure.

I'd rate the solution eight out of ten.

I use GitHub for our development codebase. It's our single source of truth where we push all our application code.

The tool is valuable because it helps us work in a distributed environment with multiple people across different locations and time zones. We have a common repository that everyone works on, which would be tough to manage manually. GitHub helps us maintain this single source of truth. Everyone can check out their own branches, which is important for our branching strategies. We can fork, check out feature branches, work on our code, and merge back into parent branches for deployment. This is crucial when multiple people are working on the same codebase.

We have a main branch and a release branch for branch protection that no one can directly access or commit to. Everyone must use a feature branch. For each release, we check out a release branch. Code from feature branches is committed, and then we raise a PR. At least two people must approve the PR to merge into the release branch. Once deployed and stable, we merge into the main branch. These branches are secured, and no one can make direct commits. Everyone must check out a branch, raise a PR, and get approval from two team members before merging. This ensures clear restrictions on who makes changes and if they're approved.

We use a peer review process for code reviews. When I make a change, I send it to the team. One or two people review the code, make suggestions or comments, and then approve it for merging. We do this through feature branches and PRs, which are where our code reviews happen.

The solution has contributed to reducing project delivery times and costs. For example, if five people are working on one application, each developing a feature, merging code into a common repository becomes complex without a tool like GitHub. The manual process of each person sitting with four others to review changes is time-consuming and prone to human errors, which can be problematic when moving code to production. The solution has solved this major challenge.

I think one area where GitHub could improve is its search and navigation functionality within repositories. For example, we use IDEs like IntelliJ or Visual Studio Code when developing code. These IDEs allow us to easily navigate from one piece of code to another file where a method is being called. It would be really helpful if the solution could add this navigation feature.

It would allow us to move from one class file to another more easily, helping us search quicker and follow the code flow completely within GitHub. This would be more convenient than having to import the code into our local IDE to look at the code flow and navigate through it. Adding this kind of IDE-like navigation within the tool would make the user experience more seamless and efficient.

I have been working with the product for more than eight years. 

The tool is highly scalable, being an enterprise-level solution. As for the size of our environment, I work for a very large organization. More than 100,000 to 150,000 people use it in parallel for core development. Despite this large user base, we don't face any latency or performance issues.

I haven't contacted the support yet. 

I started my career using Subversion for version control. It had limitations with branching, allowing only three fixed branches - dev, release, and main. GitHub improved on this, enhancing branching strategies. With GitHub, anyone can check out or fork, make code changes independently, and then raise a PR. GitHub also offers a cloud version, while Subversion was on-premises, requiring setup for each project or team. I've also worked with Bitbucket, which has a similar structure to GitHub. I

The initial setup process was pretty straightforward—nothing complex about it. You can download the installer from the official site and install it. Once you have your GitHub account active, it's just a matter of a few minutes to set up.

Our enterprise uses the cloud version of GitHub. It's an enterprise-scale solution with all the necessary features available. Individual teams are given certain levels of access.

I work with GitHub, but we haven't used GitHub Actions yet. It's an initiative coming in the future - in about six months, we plan to adopt GitHub Actions to replace Jenkins, which we currently use for CI/CD. 

GitHub has solved most of the major challenges we faced as a developer team, especially with branching strategies. I don't think there's an alternative now offering more advantages.

I haven't felt the need for any additional features. I haven't encountered situations where I felt I was missing something crucial at my usage level. As far as I know, most of the common, frequently used features are already in place.

I recommend GitHub to other users looking to implement a source code management solution. It is one of the best in this field.

I rate the overall solution a ten out of ten. 

We use GitHub as a code repository for version control. We store our automation code there and have our own branching strategy. It supports our Continuous Integration and Continuous Deployment (CI/CD) processes by allowing us to implement CI/CD tools effectively.

GitHub has improved the productivity of my team by simplifying code merging and enabling effective branching strategies. It allows for easy collaboration as team members can create separate branches and merge code without issues. Email notifications facilitate the collaboration process, and GitHub's integration into organizational structures supports smooth delivery and coordination.

GitHub features that improve code quality and collaboration include easy code merging, the effectiveness of branching strategy, the ability to retrieve committed code if needed, and the pull request facility for code review. Additionally, it provides Draft Pull Requests for review purposes without needing immediate merging and GitHub Actions for CI/CD implementation.

One area for improvement in GitHub could be integration with other tools, such as test management or project management tools.

I have been using GitHub for approximately eight to ten years.

GitHub is very stable without any current complaints.

I would rate GitHub a nine out of ten for scalability.

GitHub provides technical support, although I haven't had the need to consult them.

Positive

Previously, I used SVN. GitHub is much better than SVN. In some projects, we also use GitLab. Depending on the project, we might use Microsoft Azure DevOps.

The initial setup of GitHub is simple, taking roughly ten to 15 minutes.

The pricing of GitHub is reasonable, with the cost being around seven dollars per user per month for private repositories.

For someone who wants to use GitHub, it is important to know the Git commands and understand terminologies like cloning, pull, push, and pull requests.

I'd rate the solution nine out of ten.

We use GitHub for code repository alongside Bitbucket.

GitHub is very good for collaboration on software projects. We prefer Bitbucket for commercial use, while GitHub is used for open source.

You can get the differences, history of changes, and version control for various pull requests. You can create branch points and tags.

The sign in process is a bit difficult. Signing up was challenging at that time.

We have been using GitHub for about two to three years.

I have no problem with stability with GitHub, so I would rate it as nine out of ten.

GitHub is a well-established platform, so it should be very scalable. We have never had a problem with scalability, so I would rate it at least eight to nine.

I have not used any technical support or customer support as we are not paid users. There is a general forum for questions and answers yet no direct support for unpaid users.

Positive

We use both GitHub and Bitbucket. Bitbucket is preferred for commercial use, while GitHub is for open source.

GitHub was quite straightforward; it was quite easy. I would rate the setup between seven and eight out of ten.

I didn't have to set anything up. Our CTO signed up everyone.

We are also using Bitbucket.

GitHub is a very good tool, and people should use it more than any other, even Bitbucket. GitHub has more support for open-source projects. I rate it nine out of ten.

I always use GitHub for version control, DevOps, GitHub Action, and Jenkins connection. GitHub is a very reliable version-controlling system. In the last year, I have been using GitHub for my cloud project, using the config server and keeping some security code there. I have not used it for artificial intelligence projects.

GitHub is helpful for developers. It allows us to keep files, check old or future versions, and go back if needed. It also enables us to give access to private files to other developers, manage branching, and merge sub-branches after code reviews. GitHub has definitely improved the development workflow by helping with version control and private connections.

I use GitHub primarily for version controlling, managing private connections, data reaction, and connecting to Jenkins. The features of GitHub are very nice and helpful for developers.

The documentation needs to be more concise and easier for developers to understand. It should be a step-by-step guide for developers about the features.

I have been working with GitHub for more than ten years.

It is very stable. If a skilled developer uses it, it is ten out of ten for stability.

GitHub is very good, and I rate it ten out of ten for scalability.

The setup experience for me is easy. I would rate it ten out of ten.

Normally, GitHub is not expensive, but it would be welcome if it reduces costs for developing countries. Every international company's price should vary based on the continent or countries.

We are aware of alternatives like Bitbucket. GitHub is more reliable.

I recommend using GitHub because it is reliable and helpful for developers. Every developer should use GitHub.

I'd rate the solution ten out of ten.

I use AutomationEdge, and we also work with solutions from Microsoft Azure and AWS. We are using Azure OpenAI and AutomationEdge for AI solutions. For unstructured data, we are working on doing POCs, and we have completed POCs with true AI and AutomationEdge combination. We are trying to implement agentic solutions and agentic RPAs using true AI and AutomationEdge.

We utilize GitHub for fast tracking our implementations. We are using true AI for agentic solutions, and Core AI for chatbot.

It is very helpful, time saving, and user-friendly.

For code generation, we use GitHub mainly wherever required. We get a brief base code, and then we work on it, which enables a fast implementation process.

GitHub prompts you with just writing the prompt and it provides the code. If there are any errors, it helps find the solution for those errors. For code generation, it is a very helpful tool.

We have not used GitHub as a code repository. We have not used that feature of setup yet.

Sometimes we do not get the exact solution, and the suggested solution does not work, so GitHub could improve in that area. We have used GitHub mainly for the code generation part. That is the only area where we have used GitHub.

There can be some suggestions for improvement, though I am not heavily using this as the team mainly uses it.

We have been using it for one or two years.

We do whatever development is required in-house ourselves.

We have faced no issues with stability.

We have not used GitHub as a code repository. We have not used that feature of setup yet.

I have not contacted customer service.

Positive

For RPA, we are utilizing AutomationEdge only.

Initial setup is very simple.

Around 10-15 people on my team are using it.

I have not used that feature, so I am not sure.

I am not aware about the pricing, so I will not be able to give feedback.

We are utilizing AutomationEdge only for RPA. Currently, we are not using other solutions, but we are evaluating other platforms as well.

We are still working with AutomationEdge. We are not using Azure or AWS currently in my projects. I would rate GitHub eight or nine out of ten.

I use GitHub just for remote repositories, backup, and version control. I also use local Git.

GitHub hasn't affected my productivity too much. It's more for version control, releasing updates, and managing my work. It has made managing projects easier.

GitHub is very straightforward. I really appreciate the versioning capabilities, ease of use, and the ability to host code.

The integration with Visual Studio Code could be more streamlined, as it is somewhat convoluted at times. However, it is certainly easier than using the command line.

I have been using GitHub for probably three years.

GitHub is very stable. I have never had issues with too many bugs, nor has it broken down.

Scalability hasn't really been a concern for me with GitHub. I don't have to worry about scaling to more users; it's pretty straightforward.

I have never had to contact the GitHub support team. Therefore, I cannot comment on their customer service.

Positive

Setting up GitHub takes maybe five to ten minutes.

I find GitHub's pricing quite affordable. Although I haven't used a subscription model, the subscriptions seem very reasonable and are comparable to competitors' rates such as Bitbucket.

I would suggest being familiar with Git to fully utilize GitHub to its best benefit.

I would rate it a nine out of ten.

I mostly use GitHub to save repositories that I encounter when scrolling or searching for resources. Even if they are not immediately relevant to me, I know they will be useful in the future. So, I save those repositories in my GitHub account. Whenever there is any requirement from a client or a project with a similar base, I use those repositories for the data.

GitHub has made handling repositories more manageable and helps in organizing resources effectively.

The most valuable features are the speed, low latency, and the clear, concise set of commands. GitHub is not complicated to use and is very user-friendly. It's also beginner-friendly, making it welcoming for newcomers.

There is nothing that I find that needs improvement in GitHub. The introduction of GitHub Copilot has made everything much easier and flexible.

I have been using GitHub for around two years.

GitHub is a stable product. There are no issues with stability.

I have never needed to contact GitHub's support team. I have always found alternative solutions if I encountered any issues.

Positive

If you do not have any dependencies installed and you are starting from scratch, it takes about 20 to 25 minutes to ensure everything is according to your needs. While installing other dependencies and tools, GitHub can also be installed, so it does not require extra time.

The pricing is reasonable and not expensive.

I would recommend GitHub to others as it is user-friendly and easy for beginners to adapt to and learn. The introduction of GitHub Copilot has further simplified usage.

I'd rate the solution nine out of ten.

GitHub is used to maintain code in a centralized place, which allows multiple teams to work on the same repository. It is also integrated with Jira and other tools like CACD pipelines. GitHub streamlines project collaboration by enabling developers to clone, modify, and push changes into a centralized repo. It supports project collaboration for software development processes.

GitHub aids in distributing work among team members, allowing them to focus on their own tasks without worrying about conflicts. By integrating with Jira, it helps track the progress of tasks and their states, such as development, merge, or deployment. It provides a secure and reliable way to store business code.

The most valuable features of GitHub include its ability to integrate with Jira and multiple CI/CD platforms like Techton, allowing for seamless project management. Additionally, the pull request feature, which controls code insertion into branches by code owners, is highly beneficial.

GitHub could improve in resolving conflicts when multiple developers modify the same line of code. Introducing a feature to manage and resolve conflicts directly within the application rather than on local machines would be beneficial.

I have been using GitHub for four years.

GitHub is stable, as I have never encountered or heard of issues such as application crashes or data loss. Even if server issues occur, GitHub takes responsibility, ensuring stability.

As an intermediate-level user, I find GitHub's scalability to be high, rating it at nine out of ten. Its advanced features allow maintaining multiple projects effectively.

I don't have any experience with technical support for GitHub.

Positive

Previously, I used GitLab, which has its own pipeline features. GitHub was chosen for its maturity, reliability, and global adoption by many organizations for application development.

GitHub is easy to set up, rated ten out of ten. Users just need to set up a username, password, and create an access token. It is user-friendly even with basic knowledge, and the GitHub official page offers simple documentation.

Each individual is responsible for maintaining their repository. GitHub management and maintenance are handled by all project team members collectively.

I have not paid for GitHub as I use the free version for personal projects. Organizations may take separate servers from GitHub based on their needs, yet I am unaware of the pricing details.

Users can trust GitHub as a secure place to store their business code because many large organizations use it. It provides a reliable centralized location for maintaining repositories, and its maturity and research make it a best-in-class option.

I'd rate the solution ten out of ten.

I use GitHub and the products from its integration partners, which include SOAR platforms, ServiceNow integrations, IBM integrations, Splunk integrations, and much more.

I use the solution in my company for code management and platform management purposes.

GitHub's features are more in a module and package format. It is always good to keep your repositories in one place so that other people or your team members can access them. If people leave and some new team members join the company, then they can be trained to use the product.

As a customer, I feel that there are certain gray areas associated with technical support where improvements are required. The support team needs to have a well-defined SLA model since it is an area where the tool currently has some shortcomings. The tool's support team is responsive. I get responses from the tool's support team whenever I ask them any questions. The ability to let users manage the SLA system can be an area that needs to be updated in the product.

I have fourteen years of experience with GitHub. My company has a partnership with GitHub.

Stability-wise, I rate the solution a nine and a half out of ten.

Though I currently don't face any issues related to scalability, there are a lot of areas in GitHub where support is required. The current workforce dealing with the product is smart. In the current era, it is possible to get all the information through different sites, apps, mobile devices, and even YouTube. Rather than raising a support request with GitHub, the new workforce goes through the product's user manual and YouTube to find a fix to their problems.

In my previous organization, there were around 1,500,000 to 1,600,000 employees who used to use the product.

I rate the technical support an eight and a half out of ten.

Positive

The product's initial setup phase is easy but it is always good to connect with GitHub's team that manages APIs. If you are paying for the solution, you have the right to get support from the consultant because they bill you for one hour of availability irrespective of the platform's costs.

During the initial days of usage, there won't be any cost savings possible with GitHub. Once more people start using the product in your company, then you will start to experience the cost saving benefits from the tool.

If I consider the market standards, the product's price is pocket-friendly.

With fourteen years of experience with the product, I don't think I would face any challenges with it. For new users, it would be good if they could gather a detailed overview to understand the solution, and they could get information from YouTube or other social media platforms. I suggest that new users learn how to manage the product's setup phase. It is better to indulge in some self-study and do the homework, and parallelly consider using the support system offered by GitHub to learn about the product.

I have an experience with one of the Big Four companies, EY, where GitHub is used frequently.

I have already recommended the product to multiple clients, including PepsiCo, Kellog, Procter & Gamble, Bank of America, and Citibank. Sometimes, you have to manage all your codes locally, but it would be great to have everything managed on the cloud. As my company has been managing codes with GitHub for a long time, I always practice with the tool and get trained to figure out good ways in which certain things can be done with the product. I feel that there is a need to encourage people to use the product, and it can be a healthy thing since it will be possible for people in an organization to delete the local file once someone leaves the company, and it can be done at a global level.

My company plans to start the AI development project in one of the upcoming quarters. GitHub is the technical platform from which we cannot expect more, but we can race a request with the support team and tell them about our company's expectations and inform them that we need their help to deal with the AI model in the solution. If my organization plans to use the AI part, I cannot force GitHub to help me, but I will check to the extent to which I can receive help from the tool's support team. If I am developing some new model with the help of AI, then it is my responsibility to bridge the gap by considering factors at a solution level. I believe in always going for an approach involving a handshake with the technology partners and service partners.

During the initial days of usage, there won't be any cost savings possible with GitHub.

I rate the solution a nine and a half out of ten.