What is Codeberg and what are its top alternatives?
Top Alternatives to Codeberg
GitHub is the best place to share code with friends, co-workers, classmates, and complete strangers. Over three million people use GitHub to build amazing things together. ...
GitLab offers git repository management, code reviews, issue tracking, activity feeds and wikis. Enterprises install GitLab on-premise and connect it with LDAP and Active Directory servers for secure authentication and authorization. A single GitLab server can handle more than 25,000 users but it is also possible to create a high availability setup with multiple active servers. ...
Bitbucket gives teams one place to plan projects, collaborate on code, test and deploy, all with free private Git repositories. Teams choose Bitbucket because it has a superior Jira integration, built-in CI/CD, & is free for up to 5 users. ...
GitHub Enterprise lets developers use the tools they love across the development process with support for popular IDEs, continuous integration tools, and hundreds of third party apps and services. ...
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. ...
It integrates with your existing ecosystem supporting end-to-end binary management that overcomes the complexity of working with different software package management systems, and provides consistency to your CI/CD workflow. ...
Gitea is a community managed lightweight code hosting solution written in Go. It published under the MIT license. ...
The goal of this project is to make the easiest, fastest and most painless way to set up a self-hosted Git service. With Go, this can be done in independent binary distribution across ALL platforms that Go supports, including Linux, Mac OS X, and Windows. ...
Codeberg alternatives & related posts
- Open source friendly1.8K
- Easy source control1.5K
- Nice UI1.2K
- Great for team collaboration1.1K
- Easy setup861
- Issue tracker502
- Great community484
- Remote team collaboration480
- Great way to share448
- Pull request and features planning441
- Just works144
- Integrated in many tools130
- Free Public Repos117
- Github Gists112
- Github pages108
- Easy to find repos81
- Open source60
- Easy to find projects58
- Network effect56
- It's free56
- Extensive API48
- Developer Profiles33
- Git Powered Wikis32
- Great for collaboration29
- It's fun23
- Community SDK involvement22
- Clean interface and good integrations21
- Learn from others source code19
- It integrates directly with Azure14
- Because: Git14
- Wide acceptance13
- Large community10
- Standard in Open Source collab9
- It integrates directly with Hipchat8
- Beautiful user experience7
- Cloud SCM6
- Easy to discover new code libraries6
- Smooth integration5
- Nice API5
- It's awesome5
- Hands down best online Git service available4
- Remarkable uptime4
- Easy to use and collaborate with others3
- CI Integration3
- Free HTML hosting3
- Loved by developers3
- Quick Onboarding3
- Security options3
- Simple but powerful3
- Uses GIT3
- Unlimited Public Repos at no cost3
- Version Control3
- Nice to use2
- Easy deployment via SSH1
- Owned by micrcosoft1
- Good tools support1
- Free HTML hostings1
- Self Hosted1
- All in one development service1
- Easy to use1
- Free private repos1
- Easy source control and everything is backed up1
- Leads the copycats1
- Never dethroned1
- Issues tracker1
- Easy and efficient maintainance of the projects1
- IAM integration1
- Owned by micrcosoft48
- Expensive for lone developers that want private repos37
- Relatively slow product/feature release cadence15
- API scoping could be better10
- Only 3 collaborators for private repos8
- Limited featureset for issue management3
- GitHub Packages does not support SNAPSHOT versions2
- Have to use a token for the package registry1
- No multilingual interface1
- Takes a long time to commit1
related GitHub posts
I was building a personal project that I needed to store items in a real time database. I am more comfortable with my Frontend skills than my backend so I didn't want to spend time building out anything in Ruby or Go.
I stumbled on Firebase by #Google, and it was really all I needed. It had realtime data, an area for storing file uploads and best of all for the amount of data I needed it was free!
I built out my application using tools I was familiar with, React for the framework, Redux.js to manage my state across components, and styled-components for the styling.
Now as this was a project I was just working on in my free time for fun I didn't really want to pay for hosting. I did some research and I found Netlify. I had actually seen them at #ReactRally the year before and deployed a Gatsby site to Netlify already.
Netlify was very easy to setup and link to my GitHub account you select a repo and pretty much with very little configuration you have a live site that will deploy every time you push to master.
With the selection of these tools I was able to build out my application, connect it to a realtime database, and deploy to a live environment all with $0 spent.
If you're looking to build out a small app I suggest giving these tools a go as you can get your idea out into the real world for absolutely no cost.
Our whole DevOps stack consists of the following tools:
- GitHub (incl. GitHub Pages/Markdown for Documentation, GettingStarted and HowTo's) for collaborative review and code management tool
- Respectively Git as revision control system
- SourceTree as Git GUI
- Visual Studio Code as IDE
- CircleCI for continuous integration (automatize development process)
- Prettier / TSLint / ESLint as code linter
- SonarQube as quality gate
- Docker as container management (incl. Docker Compose for multi-container application management)
- VirtualBox for operating system simulation tests
- Kubernetes as cluster management for docker containers
- Heroku for deploying in test environments
- nginx as web server (preferably used as facade server in production environment)
- SSLMate (using OpenSSL) for certificate management
- Amazon EC2 (incl. Amazon S3) for deploying in stage (production-like) and production environments
- PostgreSQL as preferred database system
- Redis as preferred in-memory database/store (great for caching)
The main reason we have chosen Kubernetes over Docker Swarm is related to the following artifacts:
- Key features: Easy and flexible installation, Clear dashboard, Great scaling operations, Monitoring is an integral part, Great load balancing concepts, Monitors the condition and ensures compensation in the event of failure.
- Applications: An application can be deployed using a combination of pods, deployments, and services (or micro-services).
- Functionality: Kubernetes as a complex installation and setup process, but it not as limited as Docker Swarm.
- Monitoring: It supports multiple versions of logging and monitoring when the services are deployed within the cluster (Elasticsearch/Kibana (ELK), Heapster/Grafana, Sysdig cloud integration).
- Scalability: All-in-one framework for distributed systems.
- Other Benefits: Kubernetes is backed by the Cloud Native Computing Foundation (CNCF), huge community among container orchestration tools, it is an open source and modular tool that works with any OS.
- Self hosted492
- Has community edition334
- Easy setup238
- Familiar interface238
- Includes many features, including ci131
- Nice UI107
- Good integration with gitlabci81
- Simple setup53
- Has an official mobile app33
- Free private repository31
- Continuous Integration27
- Open source, great ui (like github)19
- Slack Integration15
- Full CI flow11
- Free and unlimited private git repos9
- User, group, and project access management is simple8
- Built-in CI7
- All in one (Git, CI, Agile..)7
- Intuitive UI7
- Both public and private Repositories4
- Mattermost Chat client3
- Integrated Docker Registry3
- Issue system3
- One-click install through DigitalOcean2
- Because is the best remote host for git repositories2
- Full DevOps suite with Git2
- Free private repos2
- Great for team collaboration2
- Unlimited free repos & collaborators2
- It's fully integrated2
- I like the its runners and executors feature2
- So easy to use2
- It's powerful source code management tool2
- Build/pipeline definition alongside code2
- Security and Stable2
- Low maintenance cost due omnibus-deployment2
- Multilingual interface1
- Kubernetes integration with GitLab CI1
- Review Apps feature1
- Powerful software planning and maintaining tools1
- Groups of groups1
- Built-in Docker Registry1
- Not Microsoft Owned1
- Many private repo1
- Published IP list for whitelisting (gl-infra#434)1
- The dashboard with deployed environments1
- HipChat intergration1
- Kubernetes Integration1
- Native CI1
- Powerful Continuous Integration System1
- It includes everything I need, all packaged with docker1
- Supports Radius/Ldap & Browser Code Edits0
- Slow ui performance27
- Introduce breaking bugs every release7
- Insecure (no published IP list for whitelisting)5
- Built-in Docker Registry1
- Review Apps feature0
related GitLab posts
I have mixed feelings on GitHub as a product and our use of it for the Zulip open source project. On the one hand, I do feel that being on GitHub helps people discover Zulip, because we have enough stars (etc.) that we rank highly among projects on the platform. and there is a definite benefit for lowering barriers to contribution (which is important to us) that GitHub has such a dominant position in terms of what everyone has accounts with.
But even ignoring how one might feel about their new corporate owner (MicroSoft), in a lot of ways GitHub is a bad product for open source projects. Years after the "Dear GitHub" letter, there are still basic gaps in its issue tracker:
- You can't give someone permission to label/categorize issues without full write access to a project (including ability to merge things to master, post releases, etc.).
- You can't let anyone with a GitHub account self-assign issues to themselves.
- Many more similar issues.
It's embarrassing, because I've talked to GitHub product managers at various open source events about these things for 3 years, and they always agree the thing is important, but then nothing ever improves in the Issues product. Maybe the new management at MicroSoft will fix their product management situation, but if not, I imagine we'll eventually do the migration to GitLab.
We have a custom bot project, http://github.com/zulip/zulipbot, to deal with some of these issues where possible, and every other large project we talk to does the same thing, more or less.
We use GitLab CI because of the great native integration as a part of the GitLab framework and the linting-capabilities it offers. The visualization of complex pipelines and the embedding within the project overview made Gitlab CI even more convenient. We use it for all projects, all deployments and as a part of GitLab Pages.
While we initially used the Shell-executor, we quickly switched to the Docker-executor and use it exclusively now.
We formerly used Jenkins but preferred to handle everything within GitLab . Aside from the unification of our infrastructure another motivation was the "configuration-in-file"-approach, that Gitlab CI offered, while Jenkins support of this concept was very limited and users had to resort to using the webinterface. Since the file is included within the repository, it is also version controlled, which was a huge plus for us.
- Free private repos905
- Simple setup398
- Nice ui and tools347
- Unlimited private repositories341
- Affordable git hosting240
- Integrates with many apis and services123
- Reliable uptime119
- Nice gui86
- Pull requests and code reviews84
- Very customisable58
- Mercurial repositories16
- SourceTree integration14
- JIRA integration11
- Track every commit to an issue in JIRA10
- Best free alternative to Github8
- Deployment hooks8
- Automatically share repositories with all your teammates7
- Compatible with Mac and Windows7
- Source Code Insight6
- Login with Google5
- Create a wiki5
- Approve pull request button5
- Customizable pipelines4
- #2 Atlassian Product after JIRA4
- Continuous Integration and Delivery3
- Unlimited Private Repos at no cost3
- Also supports Mercurial3
- Mercurial Support2
- Issues tracker2
- Open source friendly2
- Multilingual interface2
- Academic license program2
- IAM integration2
- Free Private Repositories0
- Not much community activity19
- Difficult to review prs because of confusing ui17
- Quite buggy14
- Managed by enterprise Java company10
- CI tool is not free of charge8
- Complexity with rights management7
- Only 5 collaborators for private repos6
- Slow performance4
- No AWS Codepipelines integration2
- No more Mercurial repositories1
- No server side git-hook support1
related Bitbucket posts
I use GitLab when building side-projects and MVPs. The interface and interactions are close enough to those of GitHub to prevent cognitive switching costs between professional and personal projects hosted on different services.
GitLab also provides a suite of tools including issue/project management, CI/CD with GitLab CI, and validation/landing pages with GitLab Pages. With everything in one place, on an #OpenSourceCloud GitLab makes it easy for me to manage much larger projects on my own, than would be possible with other solutions or tools.
It's petty I know, but I can also read the GitLab code diffs far more easily than diffs on GitHub or Bitbucket...they just look better in my opinion.
A bit difference in GitHub and GitLab though both are Version Control repository management services which provides key component in the software development workflow. A decision of choosing GitHub over GitLab is major leap extension from code management, to deployment and monitoring alongside looking beyond the code base hosting provided best fitted tools for developer communities.
- Authentication stages - With GitLab you can set and modify people’s permissions according to their role. In GitHub, you can decide if someone gets a read or write access to a repository.
- Built-In Continuous Integrations - GitLab offers its very own CI for free. No need to use an external CI service. And if you are already used to an external CI, you can obviously integrate with Jenkins, etc whereas GitHub offers various 3rd party integrations – such as Travis CI, CircleCI or Codeship – for running and testing your code. However, there’s no built-in CI solution at the moment.
- Import/Export Resources - GitLab offers detailed documentation on how to import your data from other vendors – such as GitHub, Bitbucket to GitLab. GitHub, on the other hand, does not offer such detailed documentation for the most common git repositories. However, GitHub offers to use GitHub Importer if you have your source code in Subversion, Mercurial, TFS and others.
Also when it comes to exporting data, GitLab seems to do a pretty solid job, offering you the ability to export your projects including the following data:
- Wiki and project repositories
- Project uploads
- The configuration including webhooks and services
- Issues with comments, merge requests with diffs and comments, labels, milestones, snippets, and other project entities.
GitHub, on the other hand, seems to be more restrictive when it comes to export features of existing GitHub repositories. * Integrations - #githubmarketplace gives you an essence to have multiple and competitive integrations whereas you will find less in the GitLab.
So go ahead with better understanding.
- Code security2
- CDCI with Github Actions2
- Expensive - $$$2
- User experience1
- Both Cloud and Enterprise Server Versions available1
- Draft Pull Request1
related GitHub Enterprise posts
I would like some information regarding the benefits an aspiring start-up company may have, while using GitHub Enterprise vs the regular GitHub package. On a separate issue, I'd like to understand whether GitLab may have some DevOps-related advantages GitHub does not.
Thank you in advance, Matt
We are using a Bitbucket server, and due to migration efforts and new Atlassian community license changes, we need to move to a new self-hosted solution. The new data-center license for Atlassian, available in February, will be community provisioned (free). Along with that community license, other technologies will be coming with it (Crucible, Confluence, and Jira). Is there value in a paid-for license to get the GitHub Enterprise? Are the tools that come with it worth the cost?
I know it is about $20 per 10 seats, and we have about 300 users. Have other convertees to Microsoft's tools found it easy to do a migration? Is the toolset that much more beneficial to the free suite that one can get from Atlassian?
So far, free seems to be the winner, and the familiarization with Atlassian implementation and maintenance is understood. Going to GitHub, are there any distinct challenges to be found or any perks to be attained?
- Free private repos43
- IAM integration26
- Pay-As-You-Go Pricing23
- Amazon feels the most Secure19
- Repo data encrypted at rest18
- I can make repository by myself if I have AWS account11
- Faster deployments when using other AWS services11
- AWS CodePipeline integration7
- Codebuild integration6
- Does not support web hooks yet! :(6
- Cost Effective4
- No Git LFS! Dealbreaker for me2
- Elastic Beanstalk Integration2
- Integrated with AWS Ecosystem2
- Only US Region1
- Issue tracker1
- Open source friendly1
- Available in Ireland (Dublin) region1
- CodeDeploy Integration1
- CodeCommit Trigger for an AWS Lambda Function1
- Integration via SQS/SNS for events (replaces webhooks)1
- UI sucks11
- No Issue Tracker3
- Bad diffing/no blame2
- No fork2
- No webhooks2
- NO LFS support2
- Can't download file from UI1
- Only time based triggers1
- Accident-prone UI0
related AWS CodeCommit posts
Hi, I need advice. In my project, we are using Bitbucket hosted on-prem, Jenkins, and Jira. Also, we have restrictions not to use any plugins for code review, code quality, code security, etc., with bitbucket. Now we want to migrate to AWS CodeCommit, which would mean that we can use, let's say, Amazon CodeGuru for code reviews and move to AWS CodeBuild and AWS CodePipeline for build automation in the future rather than using Jenkins.
Now I want advice on below.
- Is it a good idea to migrate from Bitbucket to AWS Codecommit?
- If we want to integrate Jira with AWS Codecommit, then how can we do this? If a developer makes any changes in Jira, then a build should be triggered automatically in AWS and create a Jira ticket if the build fails. So, how can we achieve this?
Mojolicious Perl Redmine Redis AWS CodeCommit Amazon SES PostgreSQL Postman Docker jQuery VirtualBox Sublime Text GitHub Git GitLab CI @DBIx::Class @metacpan @TheBat
related JFrog Artifactory posts
We use Sonatype Nexus to store our closed-source java libraries to simplify our deployment and dependency-management. While there are many alternatives, most of them are expensive ( GitLab Enterprise ), monilithic ( JFrog Artifactory ) or only offer SaaS-licences. We preferred the on-premise approach of Nexus and therefore decided to use it.
We exclusively use the Maven-capabilities and are glad that the modular design of Nexus allows us to run it very lightweight.
Whenever Qualys scan finds out software vulnerability, say for example Java SDK or any software version that has a potential vulnerability, we search the web to find out the solution and usually install a later version or patch downloading from the web. The problem is, as we are downloading it from web and there are a number of servers where we patch and as an ultimate outcome different people downloads different version and so forth. So I want to create a repository for such binaries so that we use the same patch for all servers.
When I was thinking about the repo, obviously first thought came as GitHub.. But then I realized, it is for code version control and collaboration, not for the packaged software. The other option I am thinking is JFrog Artifactory which stores the binaries and the package software.
What is your recommendation?
- Multiple code maintainers7
- Easy Setup7
- Pull requests and code reviews4
- Squash and Merge is supported3
- Written in Go3
- Import existing git repositories3
- LDAP Support2
- Nice gui2
- Run in Raspberry Pi2
- Community-fork of Gogs2
- Community-fork of Gogs2
- Easy Windows authentication is not supported0
related Gitea posts
- Self-hosted github like service36
- Very low memory footprint31
- Easy to install / update29
- Lightweight (low minimal req.) runs on Raspberry pi17
- Single binary deploy no dependencies16
- Open source14
- Cross platform (MacOS, Windows, Linux ...)12
- Issue tracker10
- LDAP Support3
- Great UI3
related Gogs posts
I installed Gogs after a few repos I planned to use on GitHub disappeared without explanation, and after Microsoft's acquisition of same, it made me think about the over-centralization of community-developed software. A self-hosted solution that enables easy point-and-click mirroring of important repositories for my projects, both in-house and 3rd-party, ensures I won't be bitten by upstream catastrophes. (So far, Microsoft's stewardship has been fine, but always be prepared). It's also a very nice way to host one's own private repos before they're ready for prime-time on github.
Gogs is written in Go and is easy to install and configure, IMHO much more so than GitLab, though it's of course less feature-rich; the only major feature I wish Gogs had is an integrated code review tool, but the web plugin hypothes.is https://stackshare.io/hypothes-is/hypothes-is is quite suitable as a code review tool. Set up a group for each code review, and just highlight lines to add comments in pull request pages of Gogs.