GitHub Reviews

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 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. 

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.

I mainly use it as a repository for source code. I worked on a project where the tool was also used for the CI/CD pipeline, but I didn't set up the pipelines, so for the whole test case, I just participated in the project.

The solution's most valuable feature is the reverse control system. The tool also helps organize collaboration by allowing users to share a repository with other developers.

Speaking of what can be made better in a solution is a difficult topic to discuss because it is not just technology. The tool could improve in the area of artificial intelligence methods. Recently, I made an error when I recently worked on a project since I was confused with some things, and it took quite some work to get it fixed again. Some kind of support in the area of merging should be considered for improvement. At the moment, any improvements in the aforementioned area would be something that I would appreciate as a user.

Specifically, I want the solution to offer AI-based merging support, as it is the only area where the product has certain shortcomings.

I have been using GitHub for four years.

The stability offered by the product is perfect, especially if I consider the use cases for which the solution is used in my company.

The scalability of the product is very good. Scalability-wise, I rate the solution a ten out of ten.

Currently, I am looking for a new project for my company. I know that in one of the last projects in our company, the tool was used by around 20 people. In the whole company, it was certainly used by more than 100 people.

In the past, my company has worked with SVN. I think now the standards are mainly GitHub and GitLab.

I would not be able to say the return on investment from the use of the solutions since there was no basic investment involved in the purchase of the product. The solution was available for free.

There are several licensing models available for the product. The basic licensing model is free, and if you need to have technical support and such things, then it does cost something. You only need to pay extra if you need technical support.

Speaking about a functionality of the product that was helpful, I would say that the product offers the capability of testing pipelines, but I don't exactly know what it did. I just knew that we use the testing pipeline feature in projects. The tool offers continuous testing, continuous development, and continuous deployment options that are useful in big projects.

Speaking about how the solution supported our team's collaboration across different locations, I would say that it helped my company with the fat git repository or code repository and also the repository of APIs.

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

GitHub is just one of the standard working tools for collaboration in the area of software development.

The product works well for developing environments by developers. The product was able to streamline some of the development processes in our company and also helped to increase the efficiency of the users, especially when compared to the old systems like Sentinel.

I rate the tool a nine out of ten.

We have more than 100 teams in our organization using GitHub because it is a centralized repository tool. We have many interdependent applications, and GitHub provides a platform where people can share their codes in a particular directory.

GitHub's merging feature is much better than that of other products because merging is done daily. The solution's centralized administration is also very good, allowing you to onboard more than 200 or 1,000 people daily.

The solution's cost is high and should be reduced. Our company has a bundle product. Sometimes, people from outside our organization also need to collaborate with our code, and we need to integrate them as well. This causes problems for us because we also need to buy a subscription for them.

I have been using GitHub for two years.

I rate the solution an eight out of ten for stability.

I rate GitHub’s scalability a nine out of ten.

The solution’s technical support is very good.

The solution’s initial setup is easy.

We took help from GitHub's support team to deploy the solution. The initial setup is not very big, but onboarding people takes time. My company has more than 20,000 users. The solution's initial setup takes around one or two days.

We pay a subscription-based yearly licensing fee for the solution. If you buy extra support, you pay an additional cost.

The solution's deployment and maintenance is very straightforward. It does not take many people to deploy the solution. The planning part is very important. If you are planning for a big team, you have to plan very well. Planning the initial architecture is very important, and it can be done by an architecture team of one to five people. GitHub is far better than other products because it has a very good backend team.

Since we use a cloud version, it helps support our team's collaboration across different locations. An organization that has a lot of documentation should utilize GitHub. Otherwise, they will lose their data. GitHub is the main product in any software development organization. AI is only for data, but processing the data from AI needs to be stored somewhere. AI requires collaborating with other tools like GitHub, a repository tool.

Overall, I rate the solution an eight out of ten.

The tool helps in collaboration with our team on version control, and we're very happy with it. 

I find the most valuable collaboration between our peers to be a seamless collaboration between our peers. We can connect and change our code, allowing us to be agile in our projects. Since we're talking about DevOps, we're using Jenkins in our pipeline. It helps speed up the process by automating the DevOps workflow.

Since most of our work is done remotely, I think GitHub provides a very good collaboration environment.

We want to incorporate management comments within GitHub, making it more like a product management tool. We haven't done that yet. Another change we're considering is migrating from GitHub to Azure DevOps, especially now that Microsoft has introduced it.

Since we are gradually moving to the cloud, everything should be integrated within this environment. GitHub is mostly for on-premises work, whereas Azure DevOps primarily focuses on cloud development.

The tool needs to improve its stability. 

I have been using the product for five years. 

I rate the tool's stability a nine out of ten. 

The solution is scalable because it is a cloud solution and always gives you room for everything you want to add. It is quite scalable and doesn't impose any constraints.

My development team has about five people. However, other teams are also using this tool. As far as I know, there are about 20 teams of five to six people each.

I haven't contacted support yet since we can find documentation online. 

We switched to GitHub because it is by Microsoft and has good integration with Azure.

The setup has a smooth learning curve. After some initial familiarity, our team is working smoothly with it, and we don't have any problems. We have a tool for monitoring the training needs of the companies we work with and providing training solutions. Another aspect is recording what our staff does, functioning as a staff management tool. Additionally, we manage records of our trainees and track their development.

The best ROI is that we are well organized and don't waste time on disputes and similar issues. Everything gets managed. 

The tool offers a free program. As you go, you can upgrade from the community version to the professional one. I believe it costs about ten dollars per person, per month.

I encourage others to use the solution because it is a viable tool. It will improve communication within the team, make all processes more agile, and provide a single central source of truth. A central reference point is crucial to avoid confusion, especially if you have multiple web services.

I rate the overall solution a nine out of ten. Our use of AI involves integrating a copilot within our IDEs, which helps us generate code. Additionally, we use AI strategies to assist in writing reports. We are exploring more AI solutions, and it's still a work in progress, as the technology is quite new. We are finding our path in this area, which is quite challenging.

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.