Atlassian Bitbucket vs. AWS CodePipeline

Overview
ProductRatingMost Used ByProduct SummaryStarting Price
Bitbucket
Score 8.5 out of 10
N/A
Bitbucket is a Git repository and code collaboration platform, featuring automated testing and code deployment. Bitbucket Cloud Premium provides AI-powered development, more granular access controls, and enforced code quality, and Bitbucket Data Center provides a self-hosted option.
$0
for up to 5 users
AWS CodePipeline
Score 6.7 out of 10
N/A
AWS CodePipeline is a fully managed continuous delivery service that helps users automate release pipelines. CodePipeline automates the build, test, and deploy phases of the release process every time there is a code change, based on the release model a user defines.
$1
per active pipeline/per month
Pricing
Atlassian BitbucketAWS CodePipeline
Editions & Modules
Free
$0
for up to 5 users
Standard
$3.30
per month per user
Premium
$6.60
per month per user
Bitbucket Data Center
starting at $44,000
per year 1 - 500
AWS CodePipeline
$1
per active pipeline/per month
Free Tier
Free
Offerings
Pricing Offerings
BitbucketAWS CodePipeline
Free Trial
YesNo
Free/Freemium Version
YesYes
Premium Consulting/Integration Services
NoNo
Entry-level Setup FeeNo setup feeNo setup fee
Additional Details
More Pricing Information
Community Pulse
Atlassian BitbucketAWS CodePipeline
Considered Both Products
Bitbucket
Chose Bitbucket
The majority of SCM tools are Git based. What makes this solution stand out from the rest is it's web-based interface, which implements version control standards very intuitively. As a result, the learning curve shortens and productivity is highly improved.
Chose Bitbucket
I didn't choose Bitbucket, but I hypothesize that my company chose it partly for its phenomenal integration with other Atlassian products such as Jira. Bitbucket has GitHub as a worthy competitor, but in my opinion, there are no real Jira Software competitors.
Chose Bitbucket
At the time, the licensing was cheaper than the other options, and integrating with Jira was a plus.
Chose Bitbucket
I have used Gitlab and Github in the past. While Gitlab is good if you are finding an open source solution for your code management and Github is good for the open source contribution, Bitbucket is an ideal choice to build an enterprise level product. The ecosystem that Jira …
Chose Bitbucket
I have used GitHub and GitLab before working on Bitbucket. There is no huge reason to choose Bitbucket over others. The only thing I like more about Bitbucket is security and user interface!
Chose Bitbucket
When we make the choice of using BitBucket at that time we didn't have a choice. It was better than GitHub but nowadays GitHub is not just a source control tool it's a DevOps platform. If we talk about GitLab it is even better than GitHub. We're in the process to phase out …
Chose Bitbucket
The main reason why we choose Bitbucket is because they provide a secure way to save the code using private repositories. The Access control is easy to setup too
Chose Bitbucket
Bitbucket is perfect for our business because it allows us to work on private projects and integrate seamlessly with our existing tools. They also provide a nice app called Sourcetree to help developers work on git environments without experience with git command-line …
Chose Bitbucket
When GitHub was acquired by Microsoft my previous organization had concerns about paywalls and additional restrictions that might be placed on the projects. We had made a move to Bitbucket as a result. The acquisition didn't seem to have any implications on the overall …
Chose Bitbucket
For the features we were looking at, Bitbucket, GitHub and GitLab were all at par and were in a similar price range. We found that GitHub was the most full featured should we need to scale very quickly. GitLab was at par with GitHub for our future needs, but GitHub was a more …
Chose Bitbucket
1. Github is open source and also many security vulnerabilities because it is open source. That's one of the main reasons we chose BitBucket.
2. BitBucket integrates natively with other Atlassian tools without any custom configurations.
Chose Bitbucket
I have used Tortoise SVN in the past with various teams. Tortoise SVN is open-source and has a lot of valuable functionality built in. That being said, Bitbucket is more user-friendly being that there is a decent user interface. The UI is not great, but it still makes working …
Chose Bitbucket
Bitbucket integrates with Confluence and Jira more easily than GitHub, which was a plus for us, given that we already used those tools extensively. Additionally, the pricing structure for Bitbucket makes it more affordable for our organization, which is especially important, …
Chose Bitbucket
Gitlab provides lesser features compared to Github.
Gitlab/GitHub are both from a different company (Atlassian), which makes it tough to interrelate projects with other task management tools offered by Atlassian.
Chose Bitbucket
Github is a good repository to store and share code files. But Github is open to the community and public. But keeping the research codes private before publication is possible in Bitbucket.
Chose Bitbucket
Bitbucket is good for private repositories and reliable CI/CD integration but it's getting behind Github which every day has more and more integrations and which in my opinion has a larger customer group. Gitlab also offers some good support for private repositories but the …
Chose Bitbucket
It doesn’t stack up against them. It is widely used because it comes in a great package with other Atlassian tools.
Chose Bitbucket
We did select Bitbucket for a bit, but then we eventually moved away from using JIRA to different tools and as a result, it made more sense to move our source code to GitHub since it provides more features and is just much easier to use as everyone already knows how to use …
Chose Bitbucket
All 3 software works well for development and source code control, but for sure Bitbucket is the easiest to be set up and be deployed among the team. The integration with JIRA makes this a powerful tool against coding-only applications. However, for open source, it would be …
Chose Bitbucket
Of the three, we mostly use Gitlab the most. I don't know why as I was not part of the selection process. But if I'm to guess, this is an organization preference. Our company uses Bitbucket the most, while our partners either use Gitlab the most and sometimes ButBucket. But if …
Chose Bitbucket
At the time of making the selection, Bitbucket offered free private repositories when no one else did. This was the primary motivator. With GitHub, you can now have free private repositories on personal accounts, but organizations must still pay for private accounts. Overall …
Chose Bitbucket
Bitbucket was my repo host of choice when it came to private repos, but now that GitHub offers free private repos I’ll probably just use them. If you want to manage branch protection though you’ll need a Pro membership for GitHub whereas it was free with Bitbucket.
Chose Bitbucket
I think Gitlab and Bitbucket are very similar. I am very familiar with git commands so its easy for me to use both. But I would still prefer Gitlab since it has few additional features like send merge request, approvers etc.
Chose Bitbucket
From a cost standpoint, Bitbucket is the winner if you fall outside of the ability to use the Github and Gitlab free tiers. Both of those solutions have their own merits, but from a cost saving perspective Bitbucket is more than likely going to be the most effective option.
Chose Bitbucket
Bitbucket uses Git as a client which is more advanced with lots of features for source code management tool. It is very easy to scale horizontally as per our needs, and recent new features like adding multiple file systems keep Bitbucket more useful. Due to multiple file …
AWS CodePipeline
Chose AWS CodePipeline
I haven't used any other similar products.
Chose AWS CodePipeline
CodeCommit and CodeDeploy can be used with CodePipeline so it’s not really fair to stack them against each other as they can be quite the compliment. The same goes for Beanstalk, which is often used as a deployment target in relation to CodePipeline. CodePipeline fulfills the …
Chose AWS CodePipeline
We selected AWS CodePipeline mainly because we wanted to keep the application stack completely native to AWS, and CodePipeline provided the best integrations with AWS services that we were using, such as S3, Elastic Beanstalk, and Lamba. Furthermore, AWS CodePipeline provided …
Chose AWS CodePipeline
AWS Codepipeline is proprietary to Amazon Web Services and works well when you're working with other AWS products. If you're using a different technology stack, then Codepipeline may not be the best tool and some open source/closed source tools available on the web may suffice.
Chose AWS CodePipeline
We selected CodePipeline again, because it integrates well with our AWS Based infrastructure.
Chose AWS CodePipeline
They all pretty much have the same feature set. AWS CodePipeline has been improving in recent years, and it just makes sense to keep everything within Amazon's ecosystem.
Chose AWS CodePipeline
I felt that, out of the alternatives, AWS CodePipeline was the simplest to setup and most reliable. Since my client's infrastructure was already hosted in AWS, I felt it was a no-brainer. If a client needed a similar solution with on-prem or non-AWS infrastructure, I would …
Features
Atlassian BitbucketAWS CodePipeline
Version Control Software Features
Comparison of Version Control Software Features features of Product A and Product B
Atlassian Bitbucket
8.2
Ratings
0% above category average
AWS CodePipeline
-
Ratings
Branching and Merging9.30 Ratings00 Ratings
Version History9.70 Ratings00 Ratings
Version Control Collaboration Tools9.60 Ratings00 Ratings
Pull Requests9.90 Ratings00 Ratings
Code Review Tools4.20 Ratings00 Ratings
Project Access Control9.90 Ratings00 Ratings
Automated Testing Integration4.00 Ratings00 Ratings
Issue Tracking Integration8.70 Ratings00 Ratings
Branch Protection8.50 Ratings00 Ratings
Best Alternatives
Atlassian BitbucketAWS CodePipeline
Small Businesses
Git
Git
Score 10.0 out of 10
GitLab
GitLab
Score 8.7 out of 10
Medium-sized Companies
Git
Git
Score 10.0 out of 10
GitLab
GitLab
Score 8.7 out of 10
Enterprises
Perforce P4
Perforce P4
Score 7.6 out of 10
GitLab
GitLab
Score 8.7 out of 10
All AlternativesView all alternativesView all alternatives
User Ratings
Atlassian BitbucketAWS CodePipeline
Likelihood to Recommend
9.0
(0 ratings)
9.0
(0 ratings)
Likelihood to Renew
10.0
(0 ratings)
-
(0 ratings)
Usability
9.5
(0 ratings)
9.0
(0 ratings)
Performance
-
(0 ratings)
6.8
(0 ratings)
Support Rating
8.3
(0 ratings)
9.1
(0 ratings)
Ease of integration
-
(0 ratings)
7.4
(0 ratings)
User Testimonials
Atlassian BitbucketAWS CodePipeline
Likelihood to Recommend
As a team we need to push code into the repo on daily basis, Bitbucket has proven that is a reliable and secure server to save and get the code available in no time. The administration part is really easy and there's an extra tool for every developer profile either if you want to use the console or a GUI like Sourcetree.
Read full review
CodePipeline is well suited for an already existing AWS-native deployment. It is very easy to connect to existing repos like GitHub enterprise or cloud repos like CodeCommit. Being able to define the process by code (YAML) is a huge benefit for developers who favor that type of deployment setup. The UI is easy to use yet very powerful and customizable. Being able to leverage CloudTrail or Lambda is quite powerful, especially in larger more complex projects. It becomes less valuable with smaller projects or locally hosted deployments that don't get the benefits of a managed service in the AWS ecosystem. However, there are agents that can be run on private servers to allow integration. But naturally, smaller one-off projects benefit less from the automation value derived by CodePipeline.
Read full review
Pros
  • Free private repositories for small teams - this is great to save costs relative to other options
  • They have some robust (although sometimes confusing) team and project management tools
  • They have built out many pipeline and integrations, but we did not use these
Read full review
  • It is reliable and works without errors
  • It integrates well with our repository and all other AWS functions as well as our end database
Read full review
Cons
  • While it integrates flawlessly with other Atlassian products, it's lacking in 3rd party integrates, especially compared to competitors like GitHub and GitLab
  • Using Jira for issues gives a lot of power, but it's also a lot of overhead and complexity that may or may not be necessary for your organization. It also puts issues in another tool, adding a little friction when it comes to addressing issues in your code
  • Searching for and discovering other projects and GitHub isn't quite as intuitive or easy to use as competitors
Read full review
  • Ease of use - things like CircleCI or other tools are a bit easier to learn.
  • Ability to build from more sources.
Read full review
Likelihood to Renew
All products have room for improvement. The system improves over time with better and better integrations and I look forward to even more features without paying extra! The system has increased transparency across my organization and with this transparency comes increased throughput on projects. I don't think I can go back to any other system and we are definitely married to this product.
Read full review
No answers on this topic
Usability
The architecture of Bitbucket makes it more easily scalable than other source code management repositories. Also, administration and maintaining the instance is very easy. It integrates with JIRA and other CI/CD applications which makes it more useful to reduce the efforts. It supports multiple plugins and those bring a lot of extra functionality. It increases the overall efficiency and usefulness of Bitbucket.
Read full review
Overall, I give AWS Codepipeline a 9 because it gets the job done and I can't complain much about the web interface as much of the action is taking place behind the scenes on the terminal locally or via Amazon's infrastructure anyway. It would be nicer to have a better flowing and visualizable web interface, however.
Read full review
Performance
No answers on this topic
Our pipeline takes about 30 minutes to run through. Although this time depends on the applications you are using on either end, I feel that it is a reasonable time to make upgrades and updates to our system as it is not an every day push.
Read full review
Support Rating
The customer support provided by Atlassian (Bitbucket's parent company that also makes Jira, Confluence, etc.) is very helpful. They seem to be very concerned about any issues reported with their products and even just questions about functionality. They are constantly improving the products with new features in nearly every release. Plus they have a plethora of online documentation to reference.
Read full review
We didn't need a lot of support with AWS CodePipeline as it was pretty straightforward to configure and use, but where we ran into problems, the AWS community was able to help. AWS support agents were also helpful in resolving some of the minor issues we encountered, which we could not find a solution elsewhere.
Read full review
Alternatives Considered
For the features we were looking at, Bitbucket, GitHub and GitLab were all at par and were in a similar price range. We found that GitHub was the most full featured should we need to scale very quickly. GitLab was at par with GitHub for our future needs, but GitHub was a more familiar tool compared to GitLab. Bitbucket won out because of its close integration with Jira and being in the Atlassian family. It was also cheaper than GitHub. As we started with Jira, Bitbucket addition became a natural next step for us. We really liked Bitbucket and stayed with it but we do know we have great options in the form of GitHub and GitLab should we need to scale fast.
Read full review
I felt that, out of the alternatives, AWS CodePipeline was the simplest to setup and most reliable. Since my client's infrastructure was already hosted in AWS, I felt it was a no-brainer. If a client needed a similar solution with on-prem or non-AWS infrastructure, I would probably evaluate a different solution. AWS CodePipeline is pretty tightly coupled with the rest of the AWS ecosystem.
Read full review
Return on Investment
  • The overall return on investment is very high compared to other source code management tools.
  • Having a subscription model only is making BitBucket's cost of ownership very high over the years. There should be an alternative option for the purchase of a license permanently (like proprietary software).
  • Paying separately for premium support is not a good idea. Premium support should be part of the package itself.
  • No local or on-call support available in Singapore and many other countries is also painful. There should be some local presence, at least in their leading market countries like Singapore.
Read full review
  • AWS CodePipeline reduced CI/CD pipeline development time by 10% for AWS native application stacks.
  • AWS CodePipeline reduced response time to build failures by 3% through SNS integrations.
Read full review
ScreenShots