Understanding AWS CodeCommit was a hectic job for developers at first, while it was easier for the DevOps team. Even with access, they faced questions and difficulties navigating the service, indicating a need for better documentation. It would be beneficial if users knew how to navigate the documentation to get assistance. Furthermore, AWS CodeCommit has been discontinued, so those who created repositories before its discontinuation retain full access, while those who lost access should be assisted by AWS in connecting to GitHub or alternative solutions for easier migration. Although AWS services integrate more seamlessly, connecting third-party tools to AWS CodeCommit can be challenging, emphasizing the need for improved integration processes. The distinct issue I wanted to improve while working with AWS CodeCommit related to the migration process. Moving from legacy repository services like SVN to AWS should ideally include a reliable migration plan to attract users rather than forcing them to seek other services. The migration was quite hectic initially, taking around two weeks. Easier integration and migration tools would have addressed these challenges and eliminated the issues with AWS CodeCommit.
The Git interfaces in AWS CodeCommit definitely need work. When we migrated our payment processing system at Huntington, we found the web UI to be basic compared to GitHub and GitLab. Simple things such as viewing directory structures or browsing through commit history and pull request flow could use serious upgrades. We had to create workarounds for features that come standard elsewhere, such as automatically assigning reviewers based on code ownership and setting up required review templates. The search functionality is another pain point, as trying to find specific code across repositories is limited. At Walgreens, we had a large mono repo for our pharmacy services code, and developers constantly complained about how difficult it was to search through it effectively in AWS CodeCommit. I also wish it had better CI/CD visualization built in.
There is room for improvement in Insight Analytics. A built-in dashboard with advanced analytics, like commit frequencies and pull request trends, could be added. These features would help gain deeper insights for project management. Integration with third-party tools, such as external DevOps and project management tools, is limited compared to competitors. Integration with popular tools like Jira, Jenkins, and GitHub Actions can be streamlined.
There's a very limited aspect to the solution. When I compare code, AWS has a cap on the file size, and that size is pretty small compared to what GitHub and GitLab provide.
Migration in and out of CodeCommit should be improved. If someone wants to migrate to CodeCommit or migrate out of it, the process needs to be streamlined. This feature should be added.
There are some options in Bitbucket that are not available in AWS CodeCommit. For example, code reviewer. We can't add a code reviewer in AWS CodeCommit, and we can't fork the repository online. These are the two things that Bitbucket has, but the solution doesn't have. Also, Jira has a debugging option that AWS CodeCommit doesn't have. Another thing is that Bitbucket charges three dollars per month per user. Compared with AWS CodeCommit, that only charges one dollar per month. So, AWS CodeCommit is cheaper than Bitbucket. But it does not have enough features that Bitbucket has. Additionally, it will be good if you upload one video or documentation on how to use AWS CodeCommit for beginners. That will be more helpful. There you can add more details about pricing. There are not many details about pricing. Bitbucket has a table where they have mentioned everything in detail, like, what features for how much price, how much longer you can use and how many users can use.
AWS CodeCommit is a fully-managed source control service that hosts secure Git-based repositories. It makes it easy for teams to collaborate on code in a secure and highly scalable ecosystem. CodeCommit eliminates the need to operate your own source control system or worry about scaling its infrastructure. You can use CodeCommit to securely store anything from source code to binaries, and it works seamlessly with your existing Git tools.
Understanding AWS CodeCommit was a hectic job for developers at first, while it was easier for the DevOps team. Even with access, they faced questions and difficulties navigating the service, indicating a need for better documentation. It would be beneficial if users knew how to navigate the documentation to get assistance. Furthermore, AWS CodeCommit has been discontinued, so those who created repositories before its discontinuation retain full access, while those who lost access should be assisted by AWS in connecting to GitHub or alternative solutions for easier migration. Although AWS services integrate more seamlessly, connecting third-party tools to AWS CodeCommit can be challenging, emphasizing the need for improved integration processes. The distinct issue I wanted to improve while working with AWS CodeCommit related to the migration process. Moving from legacy repository services like SVN to AWS should ideally include a reliable migration plan to attract users rather than forcing them to seek other services. The migration was quite hectic initially, taking around two weeks. Easier integration and migration tools would have addressed these challenges and eliminated the issues with AWS CodeCommit.
The Git interfaces in AWS CodeCommit definitely need work. When we migrated our payment processing system at Huntington, we found the web UI to be basic compared to GitHub and GitLab. Simple things such as viewing directory structures or browsing through commit history and pull request flow could use serious upgrades. We had to create workarounds for features that come standard elsewhere, such as automatically assigning reviewers based on code ownership and setting up required review templates. The search functionality is another pain point, as trying to find specific code across repositories is limited. At Walgreens, we had a large mono repo for our pharmacy services code, and developers constantly complained about how difficult it was to search through it effectively in AWS CodeCommit. I also wish it had better CI/CD visualization built in.
There is room for improvement in Insight Analytics. A built-in dashboard with advanced analytics, like commit frequencies and pull request trends, could be added. These features would help gain deeper insights for project management. Integration with third-party tools, such as external DevOps and project management tools, is limited compared to competitors. Integration with popular tools like Jira, Jenkins, and GitHub Actions can be streamlined.
There's a very limited aspect to the solution. When I compare code, AWS has a cap on the file size, and that size is pretty small compared to what GitHub and GitLab provide.
Although CodeCommit's user interface is good, it can be improved when compared to other version controls like GitHub, GitLab, or Bitbucket.
Migration in and out of CodeCommit should be improved. If someone wants to migrate to CodeCommit or migrate out of it, the process needs to be streamlined. This feature should be added.
The solution could be more user-friendly and cheaper.
need some simple way to Cross-account access of Repository and CICD pipeline .
There are some options in Bitbucket that are not available in AWS CodeCommit. For example, code reviewer. We can't add a code reviewer in AWS CodeCommit, and we can't fork the repository online. These are the two things that Bitbucket has, but the solution doesn't have. Also, Jira has a debugging option that AWS CodeCommit doesn't have. Another thing is that Bitbucket charges three dollars per month per user. Compared with AWS CodeCommit, that only charges one dollar per month. So, AWS CodeCommit is cheaper than Bitbucket. But it does not have enough features that Bitbucket has. Additionally, it will be good if you upload one video or documentation on how to use AWS CodeCommit for beginners. That will be more helpful. There you can add more details about pricing. There are not many details about pricing. Bitbucket has a table where they have mentioned everything in detail, like, what features for how much price, how much longer you can use and how many users can use.