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
GitLab
Score 8.7 out of 10
N/A
GitLab DevSecOps platform enables software innovation by aiming to empower development, security, and operations teams to build better software, faster. With GitLab, teams can create, deliver, and manage code quickly and continuously instead of managing disparate tools and scripts. GitLab helps teams across the complete DevSecOps lifecycle, from developing, securing, and deploying software. Differentiators, as described by Gitlab:
Simplicity: With GitLab, DevSecOps can…
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.
Data Analyst, Regulatory Affairs and Quality Assurance
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.
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 …
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!
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 …
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
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 …
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 …
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 …
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.
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 …
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, …
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.
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.
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 …
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 …
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 …
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 …
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 …
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.
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.
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.
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 …
As mentioned earlier, the features like chart visualization sets it apart from the others. Other than that, GitLab is open source while other are not and comparatively more secure that its other counterparts. Also, GitLab supports adding other types of attachments which is not …
When i was using the other platform, Some time i face down time, But GitLabs its not happening for single time. GitLab is having easy user interference as compared to other platforms. Pull Request, Code review, Issue tracking, Merging, Access control and User Roles is having a …
GitLab is miles ahead of the competition. In so many words, having a simple UI with robust security and the ability to conduct Git actions takes the cake. The competitions like to say they can do these things easily but their products are more confusing and hard to use.
GitLab allows a self-hosted version that is easy to setup and configure. It is also open-source as compared to GitHub. The integrated CI/CD tools is a plus, since we do not have to worry about those tools, unlike Github. The All-in-one solution of GitLab made sense for our …
Gitlab offers the best support for CI/CD pipelines and the highest degree of customisation for workflows, permissions, and integrations. The integration of BitBucket with JIRA is better than GitLab but CI/CD features are limited in comparison. GitLab's built-in Container …
Gitlab provides basic functionality like any other git tool. Some features of push and pull requests , clone and merge is handled equally well. It lacks in AI features which are there in GitHub and setup processes are difficult. Cost difference is the only concern while …
GitHub is an inferior product from most points of view. We had to use it and the teams finds no positives about it. Everything is a downgrade from our previous GitLab solution.
GitLab CI\CD is vastly superior to workflows, for example doing a manual node is just "when : manual" …
It's much simpler than the competitors. The one important feature Gitlab stand out is the CI/CD pipeline. GitHub required integration with external CI tools but Gitlab has this feature built-in. Compare to Jenkins and Teamcity, It's easy to use without any additional Plugins. …
Gitlab seems more cutting-edge than GitHub; however, its AI tools are not yet as mature as those of CoPilot. It feels like the next-generation product, so as we selected a tool for our startup, we decided to invest in the disruptor in the space. While there are fewer …
i have more exoerence in GitLab rather than bitbucket . As personally , it is good for me to understand how things is going on. i have used personally and also in organisation . It is great for developer to see there 3 months ago code and also can come up with new solution to …
Because with Visual Studio code, it was very easy for us to install GitLab in it and have easy access through the terminal and due to GitLab, it was easy to implement codes regarding API and AWS services to make our software better. Gitlens and all features help to check the …
GitLab provides a far superior platform due to it's great integration and CI/CD focus. And while in the beginning the UI might look a bit overwhelming with use you will find it way more useful than it's competitors. The variables and settings also make way more sense and it's …
My feedback may not be important here because when I joined the company they already had GitLab and we still use it due to the ability to do CI/CD Integration, deployments, debugging, code owners approval, and Jira integration. So far we have not had any major blocker that has …
Github is more open-source first and enterprise-first second in their approach. The reverse is true for GitLab. Both are exceptional products and it highly depends on the specific needs of an org
GitLab has a open-source community and great documentation that provides support resources and community contributions. AWS CodeCommit is used for integration with other AWS services in the AWS ecosystem and also have a low community and support compared to GitLab hence …
It was a management decision to use GitLab over other tools. It integrates well with RBAC using Terraform. Runners are easy to setup. Almost all the features the organization used before are available in GitLab.
For small projects or companies that do work on a few only code repositories selecting one of the git code hosting services like GitLab, GitHub, Bitbicket etc does not make a big difference.
But, if you are on a code development company that handles too many repositories and …
Software delivery is the key objective and GitLab made it much easier to hit the group quickly. It worked well with automation, and integrations with other SDLC tools used in the Organization and it is really easy to use. It's widely adopted and has the power to deliver what we …
GitLab's online IDE and code modification is much better compared to Stash. While pricier than Bitbucket, Gitlab also provides CI CD configuration better than BB.
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.
It is well-suited for any project that needs VCS. It's an excellent choice for teams that might be remote or have to collaborate across teams. Plenty of features allow for async working. With its dashboards and reporting features, it is also suitable for nontechnical PMs or stakeholders. It allows for very bespoke customization and can most often do much more than you need it to.
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
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.
I really feel the platform has matured quite faster than others, and it is always at the top of its game compared to the different vendors like GitHub, Azure pipelines, CircleCI, Travis, Jenkins. Since it provides, agents, CI/CD, repository hosting, Secrets management, user management, and Single Sign on; among other features
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.
I find it easy to use, I haven't had to do the integration work, so that's why it is a 9/10, cause I can't speak to how easy that part was or the initial set up, but day to day use is great!
I've never had experienced outages from GItlab itself, but regarding the code I have deployed to Gitlab, the history helps a lot to trace the cause of the issue or performing a rollback to go back to a working version
GItlab reponsiveness is amazing, has never left me IDLE. I've never had issues even with complex projects. I have not experienced any issues when integrating it with agents for example or SSO
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.
At this point, I do not have much experience with Gitlab support as I have never had to engage them. They have documentation that is helpful, not quite as extensive as other documentation, but helpful nonetheless. They also seem to be relatively responsive on social media platforms (twitter) and really thrived when GitHub was acquired by Microsoft
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.
GitHub is an inferior product from most points of view. We had to use it and the teams finds no positives about it. Everything is a downgrade from our previous GitLab solution. GitLab CI\CD is vastly superior to workflows, for example doing a manual node is just "when : manual" in GitLab while you have to do clickops in GitHub to achieve the same. No overview of code in branches is a minus when we tried to figure out what our colleagues are trying to merge as it looked off.
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.