GitHub Reviews

One major disadvantage, which I believe GitHub is and which the tool should work on, is that it does not provide good reporting capabilities from a compliance perspective. If we are using GitHub for 500 users, sometimes the compliance team asks for a certain kind of report on how many users are not active and who left the company, and GitHub does not provide such a granular report. GitHub should improve its reporting capability.

GitHub should work on enhancing its search capability. The tool should add some more features and functionalities.

I have been using GitHub for six to seven years.

Performance-wise, if we have set it up properly, we will not encounter any major performance issues with the tool. It works fine.

My company has an enterprise-level setup, so we have a large user base.

The technical support of the solution is good, and our company has used it for GitHub upgrades. We raised our tickets with the support team. Support-wise, GitHub is good. They respond back on time and give us the exact SOP, which we need to follow when we run into some specific issue where we need their support. Support-wise, they are good. I rate the technical support an eight out of ten.

Some other teams in my company use GitHub Actions.

The product's initial setup phase is straightforward. It is not very difficult. In our company, we have a setup on the server and on AWS also. We are using the cloud version of GitHub.

The tool's pricing was compatible with our company's needs. As far as other tools are concerned, I think, in terms of price, GitHub is okay compared to other tools.

Before GitHub, we used Perforce and some other products as source code management tools. GitHub is more agile-centric and flexible than other tools. GitHub is better accepted as a source code management tool, and that is the reason we are also using it in our company.

My company started to use GitHub as it is well-integrated with other tools and as it provides better support. Suppose you go into some issue or something like that. GitHub's support structure is better, allowing you to do more hit-and-test on the solutions than other tools. With GitHub as a tool, if you run into some issues, you get a lot of articles over the internet. Support-wise, GitHub is a better tool.

GitHub provides you with code-scanning capabilities. If we are using GitHub for CI/CD, it does provide such capabilities. From the code review point, it provides us with a feature to protect our branches and all that. It provides us the feature to help decide who can push to the repository or how many levels of reviews are required. I think these tools should work more on branching. In the branching area, the tool should provide a bit more flexibility.

My company has a couple of AI-driven projects managed with the tool.

The tool is not difficult to maintain.

GitHub is more development-centric and agile-centric, and it integrates with all our CI/CD tools and other things. The tool helps across the project teams to get things automated, and it helps in the quality review process, so eventually, it helps in quality delivery.

.

If some organization wants to go ahead with GitHub, there are definitely no cons or anything for which you will say that business units or companies would not go ahead with it.

I rate the tool an eight out of ten.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

We just use GitHub for the repository in our company.

So we have a central repository. So, we do recommend the need to push and pull everything, and that's how we use it.

The requests, push, pull, merge, and everything else in the solution are its valuable features. Later, people make their changes.

I don't have any comments on the improvement needed in the tool since I'm okay with it. I don't have anything really in mind. It's not like I am picky, and I don't need to be picky unless it's really an overblown, like, there are some bugs or some glitches or something like that in the solution. As of now, everything looks fine.

Scalability is an area with a shortcoming, because of which it has room for improvement.

I have been using GitHub for more than five years. We just use the solution for work in our company.

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

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

We plan to increase the usage of the solution. There are a lot of products out there in the market, but I wouldn't say I would recommend it, but if you use it, then it's fine. I don't really compare much as long as that's what is expected from the solution functionality-wise is fulfilled. So, then I am fine with it.

I don't use the solution's customer support.

Regarding the initial setup, I rate it an eight on a scale of one to ten, where one is difficult and ten is easy.

The solution is deployed on a private cloud since it is a corporate thing. We don't go for a public cloud.

The deployment is fast since we just have to run the script, and once it's done, it takes a few minutes.

My company has schedules, and we assign people to do the deployment. So, it's rotational. Let's say I do the deployment this week, and then another person does it next week.

I don't know about the solution's cost. My company purchased it. Before, we used to receive the free version, but then they purchased some of the features.

I am using the solution, and I am fine with it. I would definitely recommend the solution to those planning to use it. I rate the overall solution an eight out of ten.

Our primary use is for open-source code management and distributed version control. We use the solution to coordinate the work of developers, assisting them in developing and maintaining our source code. We also use the tool for code review purposes using the GitHub repository, where I can comment on or review lines of code for developers to edit and improve performance. They then receive a notification alerting them of the desired update, which the project developer and project lead can approve.

The best feature is the ability to track the history of all code changes, and it's easy to use. Additionally, as it's open source, anyone can use that feature resulting in distributed development. This opens the door to collaboration with different code and developer, feature, and master branches of development.

The solution also features robust security, high speed, and good integrity.

Excellent code management means that, even when developers accidentally delete sections of code, it's easily retrievable. GitHub reduces developer workload and saves them time.

The GUI design is poor, so I exclusively use the CLI, which is much easier to use and understand. It would be great to see the GUI updated to be more user-friendly. 

It isn't possible to run different branches simultaneously, and it would be good to see support for that.

We have been using GitHub for over seven years. 

GitHub is very stable; we can use it throughout the development process.

The solution is highly scalable. We have between 100 and 150 end-users, both developers and testers.

We haven't encountered an issue we couldn't fix ourselves or by using Stack Overflow or Google, so good community support is available.

The initial setup is very straightforward; creating a repository and the paths required for local and other branches is easy.

The deployment time depends on the project size. We follow an agile sprint cycle so we can carry out new deployments every one to two weeks, and they don't take much time at all.

GitHub is an open-source application. It's free to use.

I would rate the solution an eight out of ten. 

We use GitHub because it's open source and makes code management straightforward; it's simple to track different code versions and change history. It's an easy-to-use, efficient application.

For someone looking to use the solution for the first time, I would say it's straightforward and possible to learn the significant features in a day. Learning to clone projects, push and pull code, and use comments is simple.

We use GitHub for code versioning; with multiple developers working on the same projects. It gives us a central source for our code. We commit our code to the cloud using the API called Gita, which tracks which developers have uploaded the code, which have changed it and so on. 

The code versioning is excellent, and having a detailed log, including every change made to the code by every developer, is invaluable. It makes it so that if there is a bug or problem in the product channel, we can find exactly where it happened and how to fix it.

There can be conflict issues when two developers work on the same file or line of code, and it would be great to see that improved, possibly with an AI solution. 

A great feature would be the AI for code conflicts, enabling us to choose which code edit is the one we want to go with. 

I've been using the solution for about eight years. 

GitHub is stable, and they are improving in terms of security. 

The product is scalable. We have about 20 end users in total. 

The support is average; they can be inconsistent and it would be good if they were more responsive. 

Neutral

The initial setup is a little complex because it requires some knowledge of GitHub and code versioning. Certain steps need to be taken in a specific order, and if any are skipped or done wrong, it can lead to failure. Aside from the mentioned challenges, one staff member can complete the setup.

There is sufficient documentation to help with the setup process.

The setup was implemented in-house. 

GitHub is an open-source product, but when using the free-to-use version, anyone can see the code we're working on.

If you purchase a license, there's an option to make your code private, and our organization has a license.

I would rate this solution a nine out of ten. 

Compared to the competition, I would say GitHub is the best, as it has the most robust security, and most of the developer community is familiar with it. Bitbucket is also an excellent solution with solid security, but more developers would require training.