GitHub Reviews

The solution is used by developers to work as a team on a code. 

The control is the most valuable feature as developers can work on a single code. 

The initial setup requires heavy documentation which can be challenging for new developers. 

I have been using GitHub for more than a year. 

The solution is stable and I would rate the stability a ten out of ten. 

It is a scalable solution. 

Previously, we used IBM but because of the clients' requirements, we decided to move to GitHub. 

The initial setup is mostly straightforward. The deployment takes one hour. 

I would rate the overall solution a ten out of ten.

The solution is used to store code. It is a repository manager for our code. We can also configure it to run our deployment.

It is a good product. The tool doesn’t incur a lot of cost. It is highly stable. We can easily integrate our deployment to achieve continuous integration and continuous delivery.

The product must document the CI/CD process more. It must also expose the APIs for CI/CD.

I have been using the solution since 2016.

I rate the tool’s stability a ten out of ten. It is highly available. I have not encountered any issues.

I rate the tool’s scalability a ten out of ten. I have not encountered any issues with the scalability. I am using the tool for my personal projects. If I needed someone to collaborate, a maximum of five people would have access to the tool. I do not have plans to increase the usage for now.

The solution is cloud-based. I do not have to deploy it.

Our code is secure. We can easily roll back the changes. We can take features to the market a bit faster.

It’s an open-source solution. We do not have to pay for it.

I will recommend the product to others. Overall, I rate the tool a ten out of ten.

We use GitHub for developers' deployments and issue management. We follow a Scrum setup, utilizing boards, story-testing tasks, and epics for effective visualization.

GitHub has been very beneficial in visualizing our planning boards, handling big planning items such as epics, and helping us manage tasks and issues effectively.

The ease of the planning board feature in GitHub is very valuable. It allows us to work with different boards easily and effectively visualize big planning items, such as epics.

The query function in GitHub is a bit stiff. They should introduce a query function similar to Jira's JQL for writing complex, nested queries. It’s difficult to write complex queries in GitHub, introducing or, and, and if functionalities.

I have been working with GitHub for two years.

The overall stability of GitHub is high. I rate it an eight out of ten.

The scalability of GitHub is comparatively low. I would rate it a four out of ten.

We have not reached out for technical support, so I cannot rate the customer service.

We used Jira before moving to GitHub. Our trial license for Jira expired, and they did not support us with a free offer, but GitHub does offer free support.

The initial setup was a bit complex and confusing, especially since I was self-learning. It was challenging to understand where to do all the configurations.

We had skilled people familiar with GitHub who drove the implementation. We had a working environment up and running within three weeks and have been improving it continuously.

We moved to GitHub as it supports us for free. We are a tech-for-good organization.

We evaluated Jira before switching to GitHub.

GitHub's simplicity is valuable, but there are some limitations in fields and configurations that could be improved.

I'd rate the solution eight out of ten.

The product can be used to set up simple pipelines. GitHub is owned by Microsoft and is deployed on Azure. If you work offline with Azure, it is very easy to link to GitHub because Azure's cloud engineering is designed to handle a lot of use cases.

Though I haven't done much research, GitHub lacks in providing more functions like GitLab. GitHub should aim to provide more functionalities.

I have been using GitHub for many years.

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

The product is becoming more and more complex if I consider how it was in the past. If you search the tool's menu, sometimes the terms are used by clouds like AWS and Azure. AWS has a set of words and terms, while Azure also has a similar set of words. The meaning of the words in Azure is not as straightforward as it is in AWS. GitHub has a lot of new terms, menus, and functions, which are sometimes not very straightforward to understand.

The product's scalability should be fine since Microsoft mostly supports it, and I believe that it is available on the cloud services offered under Azure.

I tried to use Atlassian's cloud services, but eventually, I chose GitHub, considering its internal integration with Microsoft.

The product has no deployment phase since the tool has an open-source version available on the cloud.

The solution is deployed on the cloud model.

I use the tool's free version.

The product is used in the development workflow because most of the open source software is in GitHub, so sometimes, just a couple of links to other software can be done easily.

GitHub is good for small companies and for personal use. GitLab is more useful for mid-sized and big companies.

I would not recommend the product for large development projects.

I recently learned more about AI. In the cloud, if I develop an application using AI and link it with GitHub, then I can create a web app linked with the solution. With the use of new codes in GitHub, it can trigger the app to be deployed automatically in the cloud. GitHub is useful for Windows-based applications, and it is the best choice because of the internal integration between both the tools.

In terms of the benefits derived from the use of the product, I would say that if you search for some technical or computer problems or issues, I think that 80 percent of them can be associated with GitHub's sample codes. The product is a place where developers can get clear knowledge about codes.

I use the centralized functions of the tool for my personal use.

Considering that the product is used by small companies or organizations where Windows-based products are used, I rate the tool nine out of ten.

GitHub is an excellent platform for organizing all sorts of information. I personally found it beneficial for keeping track of my coding projects, and recommendations, and occasionally making commits. By creating branches, I could easily focus on specific areas and even delve into things like creating my website using GitHub pages. Overall, I found these features to be very practical and advantageous.

In my case, I prefer to keep my repositories public, especially for small-scale organizations that don't require a high level of privacy. I find it useful to maintain a public profile because it allows me to showcase my work whenever I'm looking for a new job or updating my profile. By doing so, others can visit my profile, review my details, and verify the accuracy of my work history. This way, I can confidently stand by everything that I have accomplished throughout my career.

The most valuable feature of GitHub is version control and continuous integration.

The solution can improve by adding video guides, official guides, or short courses that cater to beginners who are new to the system. These resources could offer step-by-step guidance on how to use GitHub, including common procedures such as pulling and committing. Currently, many of us have to resort to searching for information on how to do these tasks via Google. An official guide provided by GitHub itself would be a valuable asset to newcomers and would save them time and effort.

There is potential for GitHub to enhance its features to be more like a Jenkins pipeline or CI/CD pipeline. While I currently use GitHub for code integration, I would like to see more emphasis placed on code management and automation. It would be beneficial to have more input on these areas within GitHub.

I have been using GitHub for approximately five years.

The stability could improve.

I rate the stability of GitHub a seven out of ten.

We have approximately 20 software developers using this solution.

I rate the scalability of GitHub a seven out of ten.

The support could improve. I have received online discussion forum support but it could improve.

Neutral

We might be switching to GitLab.

I rate the initial setup of GitHub a seven out of ten.

I am using the free version of the solution. However, there are some costs my organization pays.

My advice would be to take some time to clean up your repository and organize your data, step by step, in order to optimize its performance and make it more user-friendly. It can be challenging to work with applications like this when there is a lack of resources or input. However, by investing time in making your repository more efficient, you can reduce the potential for overwhelm and streamline your workflow.

I rate GitHub a seven out of ten.

Our customer has hundreds and thousands of applications, and 12 are part of my current project. Three of those applications are using GitHub as a code repository. The rest use Bitbucket. This customer is an Atlassian shop, so only I don't think more than 50 people use it.

Any code they develop will be version-controlled in this GitHub tool, and they use the branching and merging strategy to promote their code. We use it for version control and parallel development.  

The code in GitHub will be consumed by CI/CD pipeline for the build and deployment. We're using the latest version, which has a feature called GitHub Actions that enables CI/CD within GitHub, but this organization doesn't use GitHub Actions. They prefer Bamboo. 

The most valuable aspects of GitHub are version control and parallel development. I also appreciate the forking part, which allows us to release a specific set of features to the environment. 

Development teams can integrate this tool with their IDEs. GitHub provides command line instructions that should suffice. But customers wonder how to configure their IDE because you have to clone the repo, register the username with a password, and then switch. All those things need to be performed within the IDE. So I don't know whether those things are already available. That would enable the developer to integrate their IDEs with the GitHub repository.

The development team pushes the code into a repository, and the CI/CD pipeline will perform the build. We need open-source libraries to perform the builds. It would be helpful to have the ability to link to open-source libraries like npm libraries. I don't know if GitHub Actions provides this. I would like to see that in GitHub Actions if they don't. 

If you know the language for your build, it would be wonderful if GitHub automatically provided the link to those language-specific libraries so we don't need to search for the library. 

For example, if I'm using Node.js, I should be in a position to link it to the npm libraries associated with that version so my build using the CI pipeline will work well. Then the results in the library must go into an artifact repository. We'll have to depend on JFrog or Sonatype to provide binary repositories. Git has the repository technology, so why not offer a binary repository feature?

GitHub has a static code repository; now, GitHub Actions provides CI/CD. The resulting packages should stay somewhere. I don't know whether they have added this or not because I have not explored the GitHub Actions. They're all public libraries, and the result of the build or CI pipeline is a deployment-ready package. Where will we keep them? That's where we need a binary repository.

In addition to the binary repository, I think they could also include some vulnerability scans to ensure the code we deliver is clean. SonarQube is a static code analysis we use. There are tools coming from Fortify or Veracode that can ensure there is no security vulnerability in the code. It's a complete CA practice-related tenant. It would be wonderful if they could add this functionality.

We've used GitHub since 2013. 

GitHub performs well with the current load. I haven't had issues with the tool. 

We've never had an with the number of projects or developers using this tool. We've consistently had around a thousand developers over the years. The load will increase If a customer adds another 5,000 developers, then we may see some ups and downs in the scalability aspect of this tool, but we are all good with the scalability and stability so far.

I haven't interacted with the support team because things are working well and we've never had issues with the platform. 

We used open-source Git and later used GitLab, which is a flavor of Git. GitHub, GitLab, Bitbucket, and Azure Repos are all flavors of Git. The underlying version-control functionalities come from Git, but different vendors have their own flavors. I have experience in all four of these, which are Git.

I wasn't involved in the initial installation, but I installed the open-source flavor of Git, which was straightforward. Enabling the AD or LDAP is the most important thing in the enterprise setup. I have not looked into that because the customer enabled it. I never got a chance to integrate LDAP with the access management system within GitHub.

It's a GAT now. We are using the enterprise edition. I don't use open-source any longer. I have no clue because it's all owned by the customer. We are only consultants in the project, right? So we don't have access to those details.

I rate GitHub 10 out of 10. If you are using GitHub, your development team should define the branching strategy. One popular solution is Gitflow. There are different branching strategies available. You can use the main branch loan and a toggling feature development approach where one branch is sufficient. 

However, people with parallel releases need a parallel development strategy, where multiple branches will come into play. You should consider which branching strategies apply to your current industry and development strategy. Pick one of them, learn, and adopt it in your project.

GitHub's workflow is smooth, and it integrates seamlessly with outside projects and libraries. It simplifies our entire development flow.

GitHub's source code management is top-notch. It's easy to inspect changes and visualize code and differences. Their action system is comprehensive in terms of making changes and automation.

GitHub's issue management could be improved a little from an organization standpoint. It would be helpful to have the ability to organize a work board or a backlog more comprehensively. For organizations migrating to GitHub from arbitrary systems, it's a little bit of a headache to move on to that system.

I have been using GitHub since 2009.

We've never had any performance issues with GitHub. I don't think we've had an outage yet and we've been on it for a number of years now. 

GitHub is extremely scalable. We only have about half a dozen repositories in there, but I know some organizations with hundreds working without issue. We're using it extensively. Everybody in the organization is using it, but it's fewer than 50 because our organization's pretty small. We'll increase usage naturally with time, but we're almost close to 100 percent, so it's hard to really increase usage at this point.

I read the documentation, but we haven't had any need for tech support.

We were using Azure DevOps previously, and we switched to GitHub primarily due to cost. The automated build platform is costly on the Azure DevOps side but significantly less expensive on the Azure side.

Setting up GitHub is extremely simple. You create an account in five minutes and have your first repository set up in another two after that. You're up and going in under 10 minutes.

It's a lightweight solution. The only maintenance is usually related to active stuff that we're doing on the platform. I wouldn't classify that as maintenance. That's product improvement.

We are a step above the base package. It's not the enterprise package. We're using the teams or the organization package. It has a few different names.

I rate GitHub nine out of 10 for overall ease of use and completeness in functionality.

I use GitHub as a code repository, and we use GitHub Actions a lot to trigger our pipelines.

The most valuable features are GitHub Actions for triggering workflows, GitHub Secrets for saving credentials without needing a third-party service, and the UI for identifying errors in the code when we commit.

Regarding improvements, I preferred the tool's earlier pricing model, which limited storage and the number of repositories instead of the number of users, which was more convenient from a customer perspective. I've also experienced issues with GitHub servers being unable to support moving repositories, which caused problems. For basic plans, no support was available to help resolve these issues. I think GitHub should provide more support for smaller businesses to help with these problems.

I have been using the product for six to seven years. 

For stability, I'd give the solution a seven because we faced 500 server timeouts a couple of times under a heavy workload. It's a good product; otherwise, that was just one instance I could think of.

I recommend GitHub for small, medium, and large companies. However, for very large businesses spending a lot of money, there are other options with more functions and features.

I rate the product's scalability a nine out of ten. 

The community support for GitHub is good enough. However, the official support from GitHub itself is not the best.

The initial setup is quite straightforward. The UI is interactive, so I don't see any problems there. It should be fine with any issues. I'm using the cloud-based version of GitHub.

Regarding pricing, I'd rate it eight out of ten. It's decent and not too expensive, and small businesses can also afford it. With AWS taking CodeCommit out of the market, I don't see many competitors for small companies in terms of GitHub.

There are options like GitLab with more functions and features for very large-scale businesses that spend a lot of money.

I'd give GitHub a nine out of ten as a product and would definitely recommend it to other users.