Alternatives to Gitea logo

Alternatives to Gitea

Gogs, GitLab, Phabricator, Bitbucket, and GitHub are the most popular alternatives and competitors to Gitea.
289
443
+ 1
118

What is Gitea and what are its top alternatives?

Gitea is a self-hosted Git service that is lightweight, easy to use, and offers most features needed for managing code repositories. Key features of Gitea include repository management, issue tracking, code review, CI/CD integration, user management, and collaboration tools. However, Gitea may lack some advanced features compared to more established platforms like GitHub or GitLab, and its user interface might not be as polished.

  1. GitLab: GitLab is a comprehensive DevOps platform that offers not only Git repository management but also CI/CD pipelines, issue tracking, agile project management, and more. It provides a robust set of features for teams of all sizes. Pros include a unified platform for development, testing, and deployment, while cons might include a steeper learning curve compared to Gitea.
  2. GitHub: GitHub is one of the most popular Git hosting platforms used by developers worldwide. It offers an extensive community, collaboration tools, code review features, and integrations with other services. Pros of GitHub include its large user base and integrations, while cons could include pricing for private repositories.
  3. Bitbucket: Bitbucket is another cloud-based Git repository management solution that also offers features like code collaboration, continuous delivery, and Jira integration. Pros of Bitbucket include its deep integration with Jira for project management, while cons might include limitations on free accounts.
  4. Phabricator: Phabricator is an open-source software development platform that includes code reviews, repository browsing, and project management tools. Pros of Phabricator include its extensibility and customizable workflows, while cons might include a more complex setup compared to Gitea.
  5. GitKraken: GitKraken is a Git client that offers a graphical user interface for managing Git repositories. It supports features like pull requests, issue tracking, and integration with popular Git hosting services. Pros of GitKraken include its user-friendly interface, while cons could include limitations on collaboration features.
  6. AWS CodeCommit: AWS CodeCommit is a secure and scalable Git-based source control service that integrates seamlessly with other AWS services. Pros of AWS CodeCommit include its integration with AWS ecosystem, while cons might include pricing based on usage.
  7. SourceForge: SourceForge is a web-based service that offers version control for software development, including Git repository hosting. Pros of SourceForge include its long history and support for open-source projects, while cons might include a less modern interface compared to newer platforms.
  8. GitBucket: GitBucket is an open-source Git platform written in Scala that offers capabilities similar to Gitea, including repository management, issues, pull requests, and wiki. Pros of GitBucket include its extensibility and ease of deployment, while cons might include a smaller community compared to Gitea.
  9. RhodeCode: RhodeCode is a platform for source code management that offers Git and Mercurial repository hosting, access control, code review, and collaboration tools. Pros of RhodeCode include its enterprise-level security features, while cons might include a higher cost for commercial usage.
  10. Kallithea: Kallithea is an open-source code hosting platform that supports Git and Mercurial repositories. It provides features like repository management, code reviews, pull requests, and user permissions. Pros of Kallithea include its open-source nature and flexibility, while cons could include a smaller user base compared to mainstream platforms.

Top Alternatives to Gitea

  • Gogs
    Gogs

    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. ...

  • GitLab
    GitLab

    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. ...

  • Phabricator
    Phabricator

    Phabricator is a collection of open source web applications that help software companies build better software. ...

  • Bitbucket
    Bitbucket

    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
    GitHub

    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. ...

  • GitBucket
    GitBucket

    GitBucket provides a Github-like UI and features such as Git repository hosting via HTTP and SSH, repository viewer, issues, wiki and pull request. ...

  • Gitolite
    Gitolite

    Gitolite allows you to setup git hosting on a central server, with fine-grained access control and many more powerful features. Gitolite is an access control layer on top of git. ...

  • Git
    Git

    Git is a free and open source distributed version control system designed to handle everything from small to very large projects with speed and efficiency. ...

Gitea alternatives & related posts

Gogs logo

Gogs

174
304
182
A self-hosted Git service written in Go
174
304
+ 1
182
PROS OF GOGS
  • 36
    Self-hosted github like service
  • 31
    Very low memory footprint
  • 29
    Easy to install / update
  • 17
    Lightweight (low minimal req.) runs on Raspberry pi
  • 16
    Single binary deploy no dependencies
  • 14
    Open source
  • 12
    Cross platform (MacOS, Windows, Linux ...)
  • 11
    Wiki
  • 10
    Issue tracker
  • 3
    Great UI
  • 3
    LDAP Support
CONS OF GOGS
    Be the first to leave a con

    related Gogs posts

    Russtopia Labs
    Sr. Doodad Imagineer at Russtopia Labs · | 5 upvotes · 359.1K views
    Shared insights
    on
    GogsGogsGitHubGitHubGolangGolangGitLabGitLab

    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.

    See more
    GitLab logo

    GitLab

    60.9K
    52.2K
    2.5K
    Open source self-hosted Git management software
    60.9K
    52.2K
    + 1
    2.5K
    PROS OF GITLAB
    • 508
      Self hosted
    • 431
      Free
    • 339
      Has community edition
    • 242
      Easy setup
    • 240
      Familiar interface
    • 137
      Includes many features, including ci
    • 113
      Nice UI
    • 84
      Good integration with gitlabci
    • 57
      Simple setup
    • 35
      Has an official mobile app
    • 34
      Free private repository
    • 31
      Continuous Integration
    • 23
      Open source, great ui (like github)
    • 18
      Slack Integration
    • 15
      Full CI flow
    • 11
      Free and unlimited private git repos
    • 10
      All in one (Git, CI, Agile..)
    • 10
      User, group, and project access management is simple
    • 8
      Intuitive UI
    • 8
      Built-in CI
    • 6
      Full DevOps suite with Git
    • 6
      Both public and private Repositories
    • 5
      Integrated Docker Registry
    • 5
      So easy to use
    • 5
      CI
    • 5
      Build/pipeline definition alongside code
    • 5
      It's powerful source code management tool
    • 4
      Dockerized
    • 4
      It's fully integrated
    • 4
      On-premises
    • 4
      Security and Stable
    • 4
      Unlimited free repos & collaborators
    • 4
      Not Microsoft Owned
    • 4
      Excellent
    • 4
      Issue system
    • 4
      Mattermost Chat client
    • 3
      Great for team collaboration
    • 3
      Free private repos
    • 3
      Because is the best remote host for git repositories
    • 3
      Built-in Docker Registry
    • 3
      Opensource
    • 3
      Low maintenance cost due omnibus-deployment
    • 3
      I like the its runners and executors feature
    • 2
      Beautiful
    • 2
      Groups of groups
    • 2
      Multilingual interface
    • 2
      Powerful software planning and maintaining tools
    • 2
      Review Apps feature
    • 2
      Kubernetes integration with GitLab CI
    • 2
      One-click install through DigitalOcean
    • 2
      Powerful Continuous Integration System
    • 2
      It includes everything I need, all packaged with docker
    • 2
      The dashboard with deployed environments
    • 2
      HipChat intergration
    • 2
      Many private repo
    • 2
      Kubernetes Integration
    • 2
      Published IP list for whitelisting (gl-infra#434)
    • 2
      Wounderful
    • 2
      Native CI
    • 1
      Supports Radius/Ldap & Browser Code Edits
    CONS OF GITLAB
    • 28
      Slow ui performance
    • 9
      Introduce breaking bugs every release
    • 6
      Insecure (no published IP list for whitelisting)
    • 2
      Built-in Docker Registry
    • 1
      Review Apps feature

    related GitLab posts

    Tim Abbott
    Shared insights
    on
    GitHubGitHubGitLabGitLab
    at

    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.

    See more
    Joshua Dean Küpper
    CEO at Scrayos UG (haftungsbeschränkt) · | 20 upvotes · 700.2K views

    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.

    See more
    Phabricator logo

    Phabricator

    226
    323
    187
    Open Source, Software Development Platform
    226
    323
    + 1
    187
    PROS OF PHABRICATOR
    • 33
      Open Source
    • 29
      Code Review
    • 25
      Supports Git/Hg/SVN
    • 18
      Bug Tracking
    • 17
      Audit Source Code
    • 11
      Unlimited Repo Support
    • 10
      Software Engineering Platform
    • 10
      Super fast task creation
    • 9
      Flexible Project Management
    • 8
      Project Management
    • 5
      Self hosted
    • 4
      Building Better Software
    • 2
      Best Integration with Gitlab
    • 2
      Complete set for collaborating on software development
    • 1
      Powerful, Complete, Fast, Reliable and Open Source
    • 1
      Straightforward code review process
    • 1
      Workflow
    • 1
      Very effective system, does all PM & code org needed
    CONS OF PHABRICATOR
      Be the first to leave a con

      related Phabricator posts

      Bitbucket logo

      Bitbucket

      40.1K
      32.4K
      2.8K
      One place to plan projects, collaborate on code, test and deploy, all with free private repositories
      40.1K
      32.4K
      + 1
      2.8K
      PROS OF BITBUCKET
      • 904
        Free private repos
      • 397
        Simple setup
      • 348
        Nice ui and tools
      • 341
        Unlimited private repositories
      • 240
        Affordable git hosting
      • 123
        Integrates with many apis and services
      • 119
        Reliable uptime
      • 87
        Nice gui
      • 85
        Pull requests and code reviews
      • 58
        Very customisable
      • 16
        Mercurial repositories
      • 14
        SourceTree integration
      • 12
        JIRA integration
      • 10
        Track every commit to an issue in JIRA
      • 8
        Deployment hooks
      • 8
        Best free alternative to Github
      • 7
        Automatically share repositories with all your teammates
      • 7
        Compatible with Mac and Windows
      • 6
        Source Code Insight
      • 6
        Price
      • 5
        Login with Google
      • 5
        Create a wiki
      • 5
        Approve pull request button
      • 4
        Customizable pipelines
      • 4
        #2 Atlassian Product after JIRA
      • 3
        Also supports Mercurial
      • 3
        Unlimited Private Repos at no cost
      • 3
        Continuous Integration and Delivery
      • 2
        Academic license program
      • 2
        Multilingual interface
      • 2
        Teamcity
      • 2
        Open source friendly
      • 2
        Issues tracker
      • 2
        IAM
      • 2
        IAM integration
      • 2
        Mercurial Support
      CONS OF BITBUCKET
      • 19
        Not much community activity
      • 17
        Difficult to review prs because of confusing ui
      • 15
        Quite buggy
      • 10
        Managed by enterprise Java company
      • 8
        CI tool is not free of charge
      • 7
        Complexity with rights management
      • 6
        Only 5 collaborators for private repos
      • 4
        Slow performance
      • 2
        No AWS Codepipelines integration
      • 1
        No more Mercurial repositories
      • 1
        No server side git-hook support

      related Bitbucket posts

      Michael Kelly
      Senior Software Engineer at StackShare · | 14 upvotes · 949.2K views

      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.

      See more
      Shared insights
      on
      GitHubGitHubGitLabGitLabBitbucketBitbucket

      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.

      See more
      GitHub logo

      GitHub

      280.7K
      245K
      10.3K
      Powerful collaboration, review, and code management for open source and private development projects
      280.7K
      245K
      + 1
      10.3K
      PROS OF GITHUB
      • 1.8K
        Open source friendly
      • 1.5K
        Easy source control
      • 1.3K
        Nice UI
      • 1.1K
        Great for team collaboration
      • 867
        Easy setup
      • 504
        Issue tracker
      • 486
        Great community
      • 483
        Remote team collaboration
      • 451
        Great way to share
      • 442
        Pull request and features planning
      • 147
        Just works
      • 132
        Integrated in many tools
      • 121
        Free Public Repos
      • 116
        Github Gists
      • 112
        Github pages
      • 83
        Easy to find repos
      • 62
        Open source
      • 60
        It's free
      • 60
        Easy to find projects
      • 56
        Network effect
      • 49
        Extensive API
      • 43
        Organizations
      • 42
        Branching
      • 34
        Developer Profiles
      • 32
        Git Powered Wikis
      • 30
        Great for collaboration
      • 24
        It's fun
      • 23
        Clean interface and good integrations
      • 22
        Community SDK involvement
      • 20
        Learn from others source code
      • 16
        Because: Git
      • 14
        It integrates directly with Azure
      • 10
        Standard in Open Source collab
      • 10
        Newsfeed
      • 8
        It integrates directly with Hipchat
      • 8
        Fast
      • 8
        Beautiful user experience
      • 7
        Easy to discover new code libraries
      • 6
        Smooth integration
      • 6
        Cloud SCM
      • 6
        Nice API
      • 6
        Graphs
      • 6
        Integrations
      • 6
        It's awesome
      • 5
        Quick Onboarding
      • 5
        Reliable
      • 5
        Remarkable uptime
      • 5
        CI Integration
      • 5
        Hands down best online Git service available
      • 4
        Uses GIT
      • 4
        Version Control
      • 4
        Simple but powerful
      • 4
        Unlimited Public Repos at no cost
      • 4
        Free HTML hosting
      • 4
        Security options
      • 4
        Loved by developers
      • 4
        Easy to use and collaborate with others
      • 3
        Ci
      • 3
        IAM
      • 3
        Nice to use
      • 3
        Easy deployment via SSH
      • 2
        Easy to use
      • 2
        Leads the copycats
      • 2
        All in one development service
      • 2
        Free private repos
      • 2
        Free HTML hostings
      • 2
        Easy and efficient maintainance of the projects
      • 2
        Beautiful
      • 2
        Easy source control and everything is backed up
      • 2
        IAM integration
      • 2
        Very Easy to Use
      • 2
        Good tools support
      • 2
        Issues tracker
      • 2
        Never dethroned
      • 2
        Self Hosted
      • 1
        Dasf
      • 1
        Profound
      CONS OF GITHUB
      • 54
        Owned by micrcosoft
      • 38
        Expensive for lone developers that want private repos
      • 15
        Relatively slow product/feature release cadence
      • 10
        API scoping could be better
      • 9
        Only 3 collaborators for private repos
      • 4
        Limited featureset for issue management
      • 3
        Does not have a graph for showing history like git lens
      • 2
        GitHub Packages does not support SNAPSHOT versions
      • 1
        No multilingual interface
      • 1
        Takes a long time to commit
      • 1
        Expensive

      related GitHub posts

      Johnny Bell

      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.

      See more
      Russel Werner
      Lead Engineer at StackShare · | 32 upvotes · 2.6M views

      StackShare Feed is built entirely with React, Glamorous, and Apollo. One of our objectives with the public launch of the Feed was to enable a Server-side rendered (SSR) experience for our organic search traffic. When you visit the StackShare Feed, and you aren't logged in, you are delivered the Trending feed experience. We use an in-house Node.js rendering microservice to generate this HTML. This microservice needs to run and serve requests independent of our Rails web app. Up until recently, we had a mono-repo with our Rails and React code living happily together and all served from the same web process. In order to deploy our SSR app into a Heroku environment, we needed to split out our front-end application into a separate repo in GitHub. The driving factor in this decision was mostly due to limitations imposed by Heroku specifically with how processes can't communicate with each other. A new SSR app was created in Heroku and linked directly to the frontend repo so it stays in-sync with changes.

      Related to this, we need a way to "deploy" our frontend changes to various server environments without building & releasing the entire Ruby application. We built a hybrid Amazon S3 Amazon CloudFront solution to host our Webpack bundles. A new CircleCI script builds the bundles and uploads them to S3. The final step in our rollout is to update some keys in Redis so our Rails app knows which bundles to serve. The result of these efforts were significant. Our frontend team now moves independently of our backend team, our build & release process takes only a few minutes, we are now using an edge CDN to serve JS assets, and we have pre-rendered React pages!

      #StackDecisionsLaunch #SSR #Microservices #FrontEndRepoSplit

      See more
      GitBucket logo

      GitBucket

      82
      177
      36
      The easily installable Github clone powered by Scala
      82
      177
      + 1
      36
      PROS OF GITBUCKET
      • 8
        Self hosted
      • 7
        Open source
      • 6
        Familiar interface
      • 5
        Simple setup
      • 5
        Scala
      • 2
        Cross platform
      • 1
        SSH keys
      • 1
        Gists
      • 1
        Free
      CONS OF GITBUCKET
        Be the first to leave a con

        related GitBucket posts

        Siddhant Sharma
        Tech Connoisseur at Channelize.io · | 2 upvotes · 22.8K views

        GitBucket React Native for Windows Node.js GitHub We at Channeize.io have launched #Webhooks with our API services recently. Webhooks are an important part that can help you in retaining customers o your platform. Triggered by any event called, webhooks are proven to be increasing the engagement rate to up to 18%. Take a look at how you can monetize your products leveraging webhooks

        #Webhooks #API #InAppChat #inappcommunication #ChatApi #Chatsdk

        See more
        Gitolite logo

        Gitolite

        40
        87
        12
        Setup git hosting on a central server, with fine-grained access control
        40
        87
        + 1
        12
        PROS OF GITOLITE
        • 5
          Easy setup
        • 4
          Fine-tuned per-branch permissions
        • 1
          Really easy setup
        • 1
          Free
        • 1
          Free multi-server mirroring
        CONS OF GITOLITE
        • 1
          Antiquated
        • 1
          Doesn't have any user interface
        • 1
          No tools for project and issue tracker

        related Gitolite posts

        Git logo

        Git

        291.7K
        175K
        6.6K
        Fast, scalable, distributed revision control system
        291.7K
        175K
        + 1
        6.6K
        PROS OF GIT
        • 1.4K
          Distributed version control system
        • 1.1K
          Efficient branching and merging
        • 959
          Fast
        • 845
          Open source
        • 726
          Better than svn
        • 368
          Great command-line application
        • 306
          Simple
        • 291
          Free
        • 232
          Easy to use
        • 222
          Does not require server
        • 27
          Distributed
        • 22
          Small & Fast
        • 18
          Feature based workflow
        • 15
          Staging Area
        • 13
          Most wide-spread VSC
        • 11
          Role-based codelines
        • 11
          Disposable Experimentation
        • 7
          Frictionless Context Switching
        • 6
          Data Assurance
        • 5
          Efficient
        • 4
          Just awesome
        • 3
          Github integration
        • 3
          Easy branching and merging
        • 2
          Compatible
        • 2
          Flexible
        • 2
          Possible to lose history and commits
        • 1
          Rebase supported natively; reflog; access to plumbing
        • 1
          Light
        • 1
          Team Integration
        • 1
          Fast, scalable, distributed revision control system
        • 1
          Easy
        • 1
          Flexible, easy, Safe, and fast
        • 1
          CLI is great, but the GUI tools are awesome
        • 1
          It's what you do
        • 0
          Phinx
        CONS OF GIT
        • 16
          Hard to learn
        • 11
          Inconsistent command line interface
        • 9
          Easy to lose uncommitted work
        • 7
          Worst documentation ever possibly made
        • 5
          Awful merge handling
        • 3
          Unexistent preventive security flows
        • 3
          Rebase hell
        • 2
          When --force is disabled, cannot rebase
        • 2
          Ironically even die-hard supporters screw up badly
        • 1
          Doesn't scale for big data

        related Git posts

        Simon Reymann
        Senior Fullstack Developer at QUANTUSflow Software GmbH · | 30 upvotes · 9.7M views

        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.
        See more
        Tymoteusz Paul
        Devops guy at X20X Development LTD · | 23 upvotes · 8.7M views

        Often enough I have to explain my way of going about setting up a CI/CD pipeline with multiple deployment platforms. Since I am a bit tired of yapping the same every single time, I've decided to write it up and share with the world this way, and send people to read it instead ;). I will explain it on "live-example" of how the Rome got built, basing that current methodology exists only of readme.md and wishes of good luck (as it usually is ;)).

        It always starts with an app, whatever it may be and reading the readmes available while Vagrant and VirtualBox is installing and updating. Following that is the first hurdle to go over - convert all the instruction/scripts into Ansible playbook(s), and only stopping when doing a clear vagrant up or vagrant reload we will have a fully working environment. As our Vagrant environment is now functional, it's time to break it! This is the moment to look for how things can be done better (too rigid/too lose versioning? Sloppy environment setup?) and replace them with the right way to do stuff, one that won't bite us in the backside. This is the point, and the best opportunity, to upcycle the existing way of doing dev environment to produce a proper, production-grade product.

        I should probably digress here for a moment and explain why. I firmly believe that the way you deploy production is the same way you should deploy develop, shy of few debugging-friendly setting. This way you avoid the discrepancy between how production work vs how development works, which almost always causes major pains in the back of the neck, and with use of proper tools should mean no more work for the developers. That's why we start with Vagrant as developer boxes should be as easy as vagrant up, but the meat of our product lies in Ansible which will do meat of the work and can be applied to almost anything: AWS, bare metal, docker, LXC, in open net, behind vpn - you name it.

        We must also give proper consideration to monitoring and logging hoovering at this point. My generic answer here is to grab Elasticsearch, Kibana, and Logstash. While for different use cases there may be better solutions, this one is well battle-tested, performs reasonably and is very easy to scale both vertically (within some limits) and horizontally. Logstash rules are easy to write and are well supported in maintenance through Ansible, which as I've mentioned earlier, are at the very core of things, and creating triggers/reports and alerts based on Elastic and Kibana is generally a breeze, including some quite complex aggregations.

        If we are happy with the state of the Ansible it's time to move on and put all those roles and playbooks to work. Namely, we need something to manage our CI/CD pipelines. For me, the choice is obvious: TeamCity. It's modern, robust and unlike most of the light-weight alternatives, it's transparent. What I mean by that is that it doesn't tell you how to do things, doesn't limit your ways to deploy, or test, or package for that matter. Instead, it provides a developer-friendly and rich playground for your pipelines. You can do most the same with Jenkins, but it has a quite dated look and feel to it, while also missing some key functionality that must be brought in via plugins (like quality REST API which comes built-in with TeamCity). It also comes with all the common-handy plugins like Slack or Apache Maven integration.

        The exact flow between CI and CD varies too greatly from one application to another to describe, so I will outline a few rules that guide me in it: 1. Make build steps as small as possible. This way when something breaks, we know exactly where, without needing to dig and root around. 2. All security credentials besides development environment must be sources from individual Vault instances. Keys to those containers should exist only on the CI/CD box and accessible by a few people (the less the better). This is pretty self-explanatory, as anything besides dev may contain sensitive data and, at times, be public-facing. Because of that appropriate security must be present. TeamCity shines in this department with excellent secrets-management. 3. Every part of the build chain shall consume and produce artifacts. If it creates nothing, it likely shouldn't be its own build. This way if any issue shows up with any environment or version, all developer has to do it is grab appropriate artifacts to reproduce the issue locally. 4. Deployment builds should be directly tied to specific Git branches/tags. This enables much easier tracking of what caused an issue, including automated identifying and tagging the author (nothing like automated regression testing!).

        Speaking of deployments, I generally try to keep it simple but also with a close eye on the wallet. Because of that, I am more than happy with AWS or another cloud provider, but also constantly peeking at the loads and do we get the value of what we are paying for. Often enough the pattern of use is not constantly erratic, but rather has a firm baseline which could be migrated away from the cloud and into bare metal boxes. That is another part where this approach strongly triumphs over the common Docker and CircleCI setup, where you are very much tied in to use cloud providers and getting out is expensive. Here to embrace bare-metal hosting all you need is a help of some container-based self-hosting software, my personal preference is with Proxmox and LXC. Following that all you must write are ansible scripts to manage hardware of Proxmox, similar way as you do for Amazon EC2 (ansible supports both greatly) and you are good to go. One does not exclude another, quite the opposite, as they can live in great synergy and cut your costs dramatically (the heavier your base load, the bigger the savings) while providing production-grade resiliency.

        See more