GitHub Reviews

We are using GitHub for all of our repositories. We can store the code, collaborate with different developers, build, and create a pipeline.

GitHub storage is one of the main requirements and it could improve.

I have been using GitHub for approximately four years.

I have found GitHub stable.

GitHub is scalable.

Every developer in the R&D department is using GitHub in my company. There are approximately 2,300 people in the R&D department.

I have not contacted technical support to need to contact support.

We used different solutions prior to GitHub, such as Perforce and Rational.

The licensing model for GitHub is user-based. Whenever the new developer joins we have to get a new license and register their ID. The overall price of the solution is reasonable.

I would recommend the solution to others. It is very good.

I rate GitHub a nine out of ten.

I use the solution to store most of my Python projects.

This product is very good for storing and versioning code.

The UI is a little outdated, so that could be improved. 

I have been using GitHub for six months.

The stability of the solution is sufficient.

The solution doesn't need to be scaled in this case, as it's just for my personal use.

I have never had to contact technical support. 

There was no need for an initial setup as I just use the solution on the cloud. 

I haven't had to pay anything for GitHub, I use the free version. 

I rate this solution an eight out of ten, and would recommend it to other users. 

We use the solution when developing new code or modifying existing code, changes are tracked and other team members can review the code before production. 

The ability to track external changes to repositories we are using has been very useful for us. If we have a piece of code that's being implemented and it makes use of modules that we're calling externally from, let's say NPM, and a defect is found in one of those NPM modules, we're immediately alerted that a defect has been found in libraries outside of our code space. This enables us to keep in touch with defects that other people have discovered in the code that we're using. GitHub informs us as other users discover broken code, which allows us to deal with issues very quickly, without investigation on our part. 

The versioning of the code and the tracking of changes are definitely some of my top features. 

The ability to code reviews with peers.

The automatic checking to make sure that any of the code in my repository is not out of date with any modules that I'm making use of.

The solution could have better support for the Markdown language.

I've been using the solution for over ten years, probably since its beginning. 

The solution is very stable, they have been working on it for over a decade. 

The product is extremely scalable. We've seen applications that are hundreds of thousands of lines of code and it doesn't have any problems working with them.

I'm a contractor for the Department of Veteran Affairs, and we've easily got several thousand people making use of the code just within the VA itself. It's being used by almost everyone on a product development team, including project managers, testers, developers, and documentation specialists.

The support is very good. We make use of Slack for communication and we have dedicated technical support for GitHub right in our Slack, which allows us to get responses within minutes from their technical support team.

The initial setup was very simple.  

It really depends on the application we're working on. I've seen deployments take as little as 15 or 20 minutes to push out a code change, up to hours or days depending on the functions that we're changing.

We implemented the solution via an in-house team. 

Due to the cloud environment, we don't need anyone for maintenance, that's all done by GitHub.

We have an enterprise licensing agreement, and I am not part of the finance department so I can't say how much it costs. 

I would rate GitHub a nine out of ten. 

The implementation is a hybrid public and private cloud. GitHub in some ways is similar to NPM, but it is a code repository primarily for code versioning systems. It's all cloud-based and we just upload our code to it. There are functions within GitHub that will take and monitor the code that's uploaded and any NPM repositories that it makes use of, and confirms that your code is making use of the latest code repositories. Anytime there is a discrepancy or an upgrade to one of the code repositories, it lets you know what that upgrade is.

They're constantly making improvements to the environment, adding new features and functionality. The new features and functions that they're coming out with are available to me sometimes before I realize I even need them.

We use GitHub extensively with any new product we are developing and we're going to keep doing it that way. I would advise anyone to implement this solution. 

It's a code repository, so it is used for checking it, code, and version control.

This solution is deployed on the cloud. 

There are 10-15 people using this solution in my organization.

The most important feature of GitHub is the maintainability of the versions of the code. It allows multiple people to work on the same use case, so anyone can check in and check out, and that history is available.

We are not able to access GitHub from our VPN. Whereas on the customer side, we are able to access the open source data. If the data was more accessible in my company as well, I think it would be useful to have the ability to work with VPN.

I would also like to see deeper integration with Microsoft products.

It's a stable solution.

It's scalable.

It's a simple process.

I think Microsoft SVN is also a good solution compared to GitHub. Our organization is tied up with Azure, and many of the Microsoft tools like Office or 365 are provided. It's easy to have Microsoft for the code repository as well rather than getting GitHub.

Using the microsoft.net framework is easier than using UiPath on .NET.

I would rate this solution 8 out of 10.

Because Github is hosted in the cloud, we do not require many resources to maintain it. 

The security for this solution could be tightened up and improved. 

We have used this solution for three years. 

This is a stable solution. 

This is a scalable solution. 

We have not needed to contact their support team frequently. 

The initial setup was straightforward. 

The licensing offered is on an annual basis. 

During our use of GitHub, we have not encountered any problems and GitHub adds new features frequently. How useful these features are, depends on each business. 

I would rate this solution an eight out of ten. 

We use GitHub because we don't have any paid solutions, and GitHub is freeware. It's open to all, and there aren't big licensing fees, like with Jira or any other tool. Apart from that, because it's totally cloud based, we don't need any extensions, and our developers and DevOps are all in sync and are able to get help with their second branches. So, we are all using the same platform to manage our product.

It's a cloud solution.

It is easily accessible. Even if someone doesn't have the paid version of the GitHub license, the minimum license, they can still use it for themselves. Sometimes Jira extensions are only installed on a server on the client side, so you need a VPN connection to access that, but with GitHub access is based on your ID, so you can access it from anywhere.

While we are working from home because of the pandemic—and when we didn't have proper VPNs—it helped us assess all our defects, which are placed in GitHub very easily. We don't need to rush the VPN connection and then access all these things. It was really easy. It also has two-factor authentication, which helps us authenticate users very easily.

A great feature is being able to have different repositories and different kinds of projects in a single solution at a single time. It's just a click away. If I compare it with Jira, that's one of the best features.

The only thing I see missing in GitHub is that it isn't very user friendly for key personnel who don't have in-depth, technical knowledge. In Jira, there are many functions to upload our test cases, and in GitHub we can only do it manually. There are functions which can be used to upload different files, but that still requires some technical knowledge. A layman cannot do it. Someone has to be trained with all those artifacts.

In the next release, I would like to see more QA friendly features like extensions. In Jira, you can modify different extensions. GitHub doesn't have that. They have many standard features, but sometimes I feel that there is something that I need but it's missing.

I've been using GitHub for more than three years.

GitHub is very stable. I have seen many different sections which are also easily accessible. For developing a product, you don't need to travel or do research work. In GitHub, there are many other repositories that are public. You can also navigate and see what others are doing if they have some public examples. It's like a type of overflow. You get many examples from this, and then by seeing those examples, you can directly implement that work and have a glimpse at other things.

Scaling the solution is very easy. 

In my organization, there are 130 people currently using GitHub. It has been used quite extensively because 130 guys are using it on a daily basis for checking their codes along with user stories.

We haven't needed anyone for maintenance of this solution.

I have previously used Jira. When I was using Jira, I wasn't applying projects, so they were funding the project and using the Jira platform for managing their product. Currently in the project I'm on, we don't have a lot of funds for Jira, so we searched for the open source and found GitHub. We liked it because it was solving all of our queries. Whatever our needs were, we were able to accomplish them with GitHub.

Initial setup was very simple.

There was no implementation strategy because GitHub is cloud based. It doesn't require any sort of deployment from our end. There was just a configuration that we needed to do to make it work with our code. There were simple sections which we needed to run, but our developers were able to collaborate easily.

We worked with our in-house team. There was no mediator between us.

If there are only 10 people using a particular repository, then GitHub is free. But if we increase the number of users, we need to pay the normal charge for GitHub.

I would rate this solution 7 out of 10. 

If someone is managing the product as well as doing the test management, they should go with GitHub. It's very easy to understand and track everything, and you can even see the different check-ins. 

If someone is specifically going for a test management tool and they need the proper agile-based tools, they should go for Jira.

GitHub provides good time reduction and this is what I value the most. My team uses GitHub for working remotely. Security is also a good feature of the solution. It's as if the solution creates a security barrier in the server, whereby I can push changes they make to my server once they come to GitHub. 

The solution has a lot of features. Should my developer leave tomorrow, the changes he has made will remain, even as another developer could do the work.

The branches created for the separate software and enrollment should be improved. There is a need to create separate software branches, such as for the production, operation and development teams, who are licensed, in respect of their need to match to test what they develop in a test environment. I can immediately go back and look at the features to see if they are up to the mark, such as those involving unnecessary code. 

As someone who works in infrastructure, I know how hard it can be to create things on this level, but it can be worthwhile. Confirmations and requisite future updates are in the end user's domain. The migration of the databases, such as the migration of my websites to the new WordPress sites, works at times but is slow. In such a case, the hardware must be increased. When it comes to the question of whether we should change to new servers and set up a new infrastructure level, I have found GitHub to be very helpful. It pushes the code directly to the repository and dumps the database on the other end. 

The security point should be addressed in the next release. Scaling is also an issue. If the code is very high on the user side and I should suddenly find myself wanting to increase the monthly use of my website from 10,000 to 30,000 people, it can create an imbalance in the infrastructure. In the case of the code level, we may see issues involving optimization. 

I have been using GitHub for more than seven or eight months. 

The solution is easily scalable and encourages migration. While I have other products at hand, GitHub makes things fun. We wish to lead and expand. We want to scale this project to the next level, since we have certain customers in hand.

I had to make use of technical support two months back, when I first started working and had a learning curve. This was while I was exploring new ideas as relate to my infrastructure experience. When encountering changes to the core side or the scaling, it is necessary to make use of technical support. An abrupt increase can cause problems with the infrastructure, so I am looking for solutions that will not require me to make changes to it each time this should occur. GitHub allows the core to be scaled up with ease and it offers auto scaling. 

There is a certain amount of difficulty involved in the work we did with the developer. This is because we use private repositories, not public ones, for security reasons and this requires the developer to have a code for a secure shell. 

When we do the initial setup in the cPanel, we are supposed to utilize it for our infrastructure. The enrollment is set up to the cloud and the cPanel and GitHub to the local systems, wherever the developer may be found. Usually, they are remote. We have confidence that the developer reposits first to his local system and from there to the cloud and we must execute shell for these development purposes.  

Our initial deployment was with Cloud One. The cPanel is the browser involved. We make use of WordPress.  

GitHub is the perfect tool for use at present and is extremely necessary. It is one of the best solutions out there. Apart from GitHub, you need to use the local Git version control system since it involves code on a cloud platform. Git version is very helpful. One could download the large types of codes to do on the core level so that there will not be a need to go to the cloud setup every time. The code commands can be run from the local system. Setup and migration can be done with ease. The person would set up the order and the view. In my experience, GitHub is very easy to operate. 

I rate GitHub as a perfect ten out of ten. 

I previously used different tools. At present, I am utilizing GitHub and providing assistance with cell phone numbers. The solution allows me to make workspaces and perform changes with ease. It also allows for easy monitoring. I receive updates from Slack for confirmation purposes. There is no need to wait on my developers, as a connection can be made with the production server. 

Currently, the solution is our source control system. We manage the DevOps pipeline for the company and it's the version control backbone.

I'm curious as to what DevOps Tools can be integrated into GitHub to get it to be on part with the capabilities that come out of the box in GitLab, or whether we should just switch to GitLab to get all of those capabilities.

The stability is quite good.

The scalability is excellent.

We've found the technical support to be very helpful.

Overall, it's a very good product.

If it had all of the end-to-end integration, then we probably wouldn't have any doubts about what we have installed. However, at this point, we're still trying to figure out how to use it end-to-end. 

The new version is supposed to make GitHub actions available to us within the on-prem instance. We're waiting for that, just to see how that plays out with the rest of the source control features and to see if that gives us some semblance of similar capability to what GitLab supposedly provides.

I don't know if there are any plans to do a better integration with the front-end type of tooling. I would like to see it evolve to a full-blown DevOps stacks hopefully similar to GitLab at some point.

We've found the way licensing is set up to be very challenging.  Also, the LDAP sync capability falls over frequently due to the complexity of our LDAP domains.  This requires us to perform manual LDAP syncs almost on a daily basis

I'm new to the company. That said, I would guess that the company has probably been using the product for about three to four years at this point. It's been a while. I've used it within the last year and I'm continuing to use it regularly.

As far as stability goes, it's been good. We haven't really had a lot of major issues yet. There are no bugs or glitches. It doesn't crash or freeze.

It's obviously very scalable. We have thousands of users on it and there are no concerns.

We have a monthly call with the technical sales folks. They look after our every need and they're very technically knowledgeable as well. If we go through support, usually issues are resolved fairly quickly. There are no complaints there. We're very satisfied with the level of support on offer.

I just manage the team. I've not involved in the more technical details. I wasn't present for the implementation process. I can't speak to how easy it was, or how difficult, via any first-hand knowledge. 

The licensing model that they have is annoying. One of the things that we struggle all the time with is people that have left the team or the group. We have lots of application teams that are using GitHub. People are moving constantly between organizations, they're moving to different teams, they're moving out of development. 

There's really not an easy way to track who's still using licenses. If they've vacated the position unless somebody goes back into the active directory and actually removes them from the group, they're still holding onto a seat and we're still trying to figure out, how to manage this so that their seat automatically gets reclaimed when people are moving around and it's not a very straightforward process. It takes a lot of effort on our part to try and keep the inventory seats available and managed properly.

We aren't partners. We are simply customers and end-users.

We are still on the previous version. We are still waiting for more stability from the latest version before we update everything.

It's a great product. That said, it needs some work still to be able to do everything that GitLab can do, for example. I'm not sure what the future plans are for GitHub. I know they're working on adding a lot of capabilities now that they're part of Microsoft. They're probably going to make it a much more robust solution - not just a version control system. My perspective is as an enterprise on-prem user. I don't know from an open-source community standpoint, how they feel about the changes. I'm sure most of the users are pretty happy with it as a hosting platform. However, my need is specific to my organizational uses.

I'd rate the solution at a seven out of ten.