Need advice about which tool to choose?Ask the StackShare community!
Bitbucket vs fastlane: What are the differences?
Introduction
In this article, we will explore the key differences between Bitbucket and fastlane, two popular tools used in software development and continuous integration processes.
- Version Control System (VCS) Integration:
- Bitbucket provides a built-in version control system, allowing developers to easily manage and collaborate on their code. It supports both Git and Mercurial, offering flexibility for different project requirements.
On the other hand, fastlane is not a VCS itself, but a tool that works alongside existing VCS platforms like Bitbucket. It automates various tasks related to the release cycle, such as build, testing, and deployment processes.
Platform Compatibility:
Bitbucket is a web-based platform that can be accessed from any modern web browser, providing a consistent user experience across different operating systems. It also offers native mobile apps for iOS and Android.
In contrast, fastlane is a command-line tool that can be used on various operating systems, including macOS, Linux, and Windows. It provides a command-line interface which can be integrated into existing development workflows and build systems.
Code Review and Collaboration Features:
Bitbucket offers built-in code review features, allowing developers to easily review and comment on code changes. It also supports integrations with popular collaboration tools like Jira and Trello, enabling seamless project management.
Fastlane, being a release automation tool, does not provide code review or collaboration features. Its focus is on automating the release process, ensuring the efficient and error-free deployment of applications.
Release Automation Capabilities:
One of the primary strengths of fastlane is its comprehensive release automation capabilities. It simplifies the release process by automating various tasks, such as building, testing, code signing, and deployment. It supports multiple platforms and tools, including iOS, Android, macOS, and Xcode.
While Bitbucket does provide some automation features, such as pipelines for continuous integration and deployment, it does not offer the same level of automation and flexibility as fastlane.
Community Support and Extensions:
Bitbucket has a large and active community, with a wide range of extensions, plugins, and integrations available. It provides extensive documentation and resources, making it easier for developers to find solutions and customize their workflows.
Fastlane also has an active community and supports a variety of plugins and integrations. However, its focus is more on the release automation process, so the range of available extensions may be more limited compared to Bitbucket.
Pricing and Licensing:
Bitbucket offers both free and paid plans, with the pricing based on the number of users and repositories. The free plan provides basic features and limited resources, while the paid plans offer more advanced functionalities and increased resource limits.
Fastlane, on the other hand, is an open-source project and is available for free. It can be used without any licensing fees, making it a cost-effective choice for automating the release process.
In summary, Bitbucket is primarily a version control system with built-in collaboration and automation features, while fastlane is a specialized release automation tool that works alongside existing VCS platforms. Bitbucket offers a comprehensive platform for code management, collaboration, and automation, whereas fastlane focuses specifically on automating the release process.
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?
These are pretty competitive, and to recommend one over the other would require understanding your usage. Also, what other tools you use: for instance, what do you use for Issue-tracking, or for build pipelines. In your case, since you are already using Bitbucket, the question would be: do you have any current pain-points? And, on the other hand, do you already use Atlassian's JIRA, where you'd benefit from the tight integration? So, though I would not recommend one over the other just in general,. But, if Bitbucket fulfills your current use-cases, then there seems to be little motivation to move.
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.
I first used BitBucket because it had private repo's, and it didn't disappoint me. Also with the smooth integration of Jira, the decision to use BitBucket as a full application maintenance service was as easy as 1, 2, 3.
I honestly love BitBucket, by the looks, by the UI, and the smooth integration with Tower.
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.
Pros of Bitbucket
- Free private repos904
- Simple setup397
- Nice ui and tools348
- Unlimited private repositories341
- 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
- Compatible with Mac and Windows7
- Source Code Insight6
- Price6
- Login with Google5
- Create a wiki5
- Approve pull request button5
- Customizable pipelines4
- #2 Atlassian Product after JIRA4
- Also supports Mercurial3
- Unlimited Private Repos at no cost3
- Continuous Integration and Delivery3
- Academic license program2
- Multilingual interface2
- Teamcity2
- Open source friendly2
- Issues tracker2
- IAM2
- IAM integration2
- Mercurial Support2
Pros of fastlane
- Easy to use20
- Open Source13
- Itunes connect deployment13
- Incredible flexability11
- Third party integrations9
- Provisioning profile management3
- Certificate management3
- All in one iOS DevOps1
- Can be used for Android as well1
- Integrate anything with fastlane0
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 fastlane
Sign up to add or upvote consMake informed product decisions
What is Bitbucket?
What is fastlane?
Need advice about which tool to choose?Ask the StackShare community!
Sign up to get full access to all the companiesMake informed product decisions
Sign up to get full access to all the tool integrationsMake informed product decisions
Blog Posts
+4
+32
+47+34