Need advice about which tool to choose?Ask the StackShare community!
Bitbucket vs Docker: What are the differences?
Introduction
In the world of software development, there are various tools and technologies used to optimize the development process. Two popular tools in this domain are Bitbucket and Docker. Bitbucket is a web-based version control repository hosting service while Docker is an open-source platform used for automating the deployment and scaling of applications. Although both tools cater to different aspects of software development, they share some similarities as well as distinct differences.
Architecture: Bitbucket is primarily used for managing and versioning source code repositories, offering features like pull requests, issue tracking, and code reviews. On the other hand, Docker is primarily focused on containerization, allowing developers to package their applications along with dependencies into portable and lightweight containers. While Bitbucket provides a platform for collaboration and version control, Docker is more concerned with the runtime environment and ensuring consistent application deployment.
Functionality: Bitbucket provides tools for project management, code collaboration, and integration with other popular software development platforms like Jira and Trello. It offers features such as continuous integration and deployment through its integration with CI/CD tools. Docker, on the other hand, provides a platform for building, packaging, and distributing applications using containers. It allows for easy deployment and scalability, providing a consistent and reproducible environment for applications to run.
Workflow: Bitbucket follows a traditional workflow for software development, where developers push their changes to a central repository, create branches for different features, and collaborate through pull requests and code reviews. Docker, on the other hand, introduces a new paradigm of containerization, where applications are packaged along with their dependencies and can be run in any environment that supports Docker. It brings a more modular and portable approach to development and deployment.
Scalability: Bitbucket is primarily designed for collaboration and version control, making it suitable for small to medium-sized development teams. It provides features to manage code repositories and facilitates efficient collaboration among developers. Docker, on the other hand, excels in enabling scalability through containerization. It allows applications to be deployed in a consistent and reproducible manner across different environments, making it ideal for container-based deployments and microservices architecture.
Flexibility and Portability: Bitbucket supports various version control systems like Git and Mercurial, providing flexibility for developers to choose their preferred VCS. It also offers integrations with other tools and platforms, making it a versatile solution for version control and collaboration in software development. Docker, on the other hand, provides a platform-independent approach to application deployment. It allows developers to create containerized applications that can run on any system with Docker support, ensuring portability and eliminating system-specific dependencies.
Deployment and Infrastructure Management: Bitbucket, being a repository hosting service, focuses on managing the codebase and collaboration aspects of software development. While it offers integration with CI/CD tools for automated deployments, it does not provide infrastructure management capabilities. Docker, on the other hand, provides a comprehensive solution for application deployment and infrastructure management. It includes tools like Docker Swarm and Kubernetes for orchestrating containerized applications and managing the underlying infrastructure.
In summary, Bitbucket and Docker cater to different aspects of the software development lifecycle. Bitbucket serves as a version control and collaboration platform, while Docker focuses on containerization and portable application deployment. Therefore, the key differences between Bitbucket and Docker lie in their architecture, functionality, workflow, scalability, flexibility, and deployment capabilities.
Do you review your Pull/Merge Request before assigning Reviewers?
If you work in a team opening a Pull Request (or Merge Request) looks appropriate. However, have you ever thought about opening a Pull/Merge Request when working by yourself? Here's a checklist of things you can review in your own:
- Pick the correct target branch
- Make Drafts explicit
- Name things properly
- Ask help for tools
- Remove the noise
- Fetch necessary data
- Understand Mergeability
- Pass the message
- Add screenshots
- Be found in the future
- Comment inline in your changes
Read the blog post for more detailed explanation for each item :D
What else do you review before asking for code review?
One of the magic tricks git performs is the ability to rewrite log history. You can do it in many ways, but git rebase -i
is the one I most use. With this command, It’s possible to switch commits order, remove a commit, squash two or more commits, or edit, for instance.
It’s particularly useful to run it before opening a pull request. It allows developers to “clean up” the mess and organize commits before submitting to review. If you follow the practice 3 and 4, then the list of commits should look very similar to a task list. It should reveal the rationale you had, telling the story of how you end up with that final code.
lxd/lxc and Docker aren't congruent so this comparison needs a more detailed look; but in short I can say: the lxd-integrated administration of storage including zfs with its snapshot capabilities as well as the system container (multi-process) approach of lxc vs. the limited single-process container approach of Docker is the main reason I chose lxd over Docker.
Pros of Bitbucket
- Free private repos905
- Simple setup397
- Nice ui and tools349
- Unlimited private repositories342
- Affordable git hosting240
- Integrates with many apis and services123
- Reliable uptime119
- Nice gui87
- Pull requests and code reviews85
- Very customisable58
- Mercurial repositories16
- SourceTree integration14
- JIRA integration12
- Track every commit to an issue in JIRA10
- Deployment hooks8
- Best free alternative to Github8
- Automatically share repositories with all your teammates7
- Source Code Insight7
- Compatible with Mac and Windows7
- Price6
- Login with Google5
- Create a wiki5
- Approve pull request button5
- Customizable pipelines4
- #2 Atlassian Product after JIRA4
- Unlimited Private Repos at no cost3
- Also supports Mercurial3
- Continuous Integration and Delivery3
- Mercurial Support2
- Multilingual interface2
- Teamcity2
- Open source friendly2
- Issues tracker2
- IAM2
- Academic license program2
- IAM integration2
Pros of Docker
- Rapid integration and build up823
- Isolation692
- Open source521
- Testability and reproducibility505
- Lightweight460
- Standardization218
- Scalable185
- Upgrading / downgrading / application versions106
- Security88
- Private paas environments85
- Portability34
- Limit resource usage26
- Game changer17
- I love the way docker has changed virtualization16
- Fast14
- Concurrency12
- Docker's Compose tools8
- Fast and Portable6
- Easy setup6
- Because its fun5
- Makes shipping to production very simple4
- It's dope3
- Highly useful3
- Does a nice job hogging memory2
- Open source and highly configurable2
- Simplicity, isolation, resource effective2
- MacOS support FAKE2
- Its cool2
- Docker hub for the FTW2
- HIgh Throughput2
- Very easy to setup integrate and build2
- Package the environment with the application2
- Super2
- Asdfd0
Sign up to add or upvote prosMake informed product decisions
Cons of Bitbucket
- Not much community activity19
- Difficult to review prs because of confusing ui17
- Quite buggy15
- 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
Cons of Docker
- New versions == broken features8
- Unreliable networking6
- Documentation not always in sync6
- Moves quickly4
- Not Secure3