Need advice about which tool to choose?Ask the StackShare community!
AWS CodeCommit vs RhodeCode: What are the differences?
Developers describe AWS CodeCommit as "Fully-managed source control service that makes it easy for companies to host secure and highly scalable private Git repositories". 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. On the other hand, RhodeCode is detailed as "Enterprise source code management platform for behind-the-firewall Mercurial, Git & Subversion. Secure and Open Source". RhodeCode provides centralized control over distributed code repositories. Developers get code review tools and custom APIs that work in Mercurial, Git & SVN. Firms get unified security and user control so that their CTOs can sleep at night.
AWS CodeCommit and RhodeCode belong to "Code Collaboration & Version Control" category of the tech stack.
Some of the features offered by AWS CodeCommit are:
- Collaboration
- Encryption
- Access Control
On the other hand, RhodeCode provides the following key features:
- unified repository management across Mercurial, Git & SVN
- full-text source code search
- web-based code editor
"Free private repos" is the primary reason why developers consider AWS CodeCommit over the competitors, whereas "Self hosted" was stated as the key factor in picking RhodeCode.
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?
Hi Kavita. It would be useful to explain in a bit more detail the integration to Jira you would like to achieve. Some of the Jira plugins will work with any git repository, regardless if its github/bitbucket/gitlab.
Pros of AWS CodeCommit
- Free private repos44
- IAM integration26
- Pay-As-You-Go Pricing24
- Amazon feels the most Secure20
- Repo data encrypted at rest19
- I can make repository by myself if I have AWS account11
- Faster deployments when using other AWS services11
- AWS CodePipeline integration8
- Codebuild integration6
- Does not support web hooks yet! :(6
- Cost Effective4
- No Git LFS! Dealbreaker for me2
- Elastic Beanstalk Integration2
- Integrated with AWS Ecosystem2
- Integration via SQS/SNS for events (replaces webhooks)1
- IAM1
- Issue tracker1
- Available in Ireland (Dublin) region1
- CodeDeploy Integration1
- CodeCommit Trigger for an AWS Lambda Function1
- Open source friendly1
- Only US Region1
- Ui0
Pros of RhodeCode
- Self hosted22
- Great performance20
- Multiple version control systems19
- Integrations with CI / issue trackers19
- Full text search18
- Open Source18
- Best in class permission18
- Secure authentication17
- Permission system15
- One line online/offiline upgrades11
- Easy installation7
- Supports multiple version control systems6
- Advanced code reviews6
- Free, unlimited users6
- free up to 25users3
- Runs under Windows, too3
- SVN support1
- Features and great support1
Sign up to add or upvote prosMake informed product decisions
Cons of AWS CodeCommit
- UI sucks12
- SLOW4
- No Issue Tracker3
- Bad diffing/no blame2
- NO LFS support2
- No fork2
- No webhooks2
- Can't download file from UI1
- Only time based triggers1
- Accident-prone UI0
Cons of RhodeCode
- No easy installation for Windows0
