Need advice about which tool to choose?Ask the StackShare community!
Bitbucket vs Gitea: What are the differences?
Introduction
Bitbucket and Gitea are both popular version control systems that allow developers to manage and collaborate on code repositories. While they serve a similar purpose, there are several key differences between the two platforms. In this article, we will explore these differences and highlight their unique features and functionalities.
Hosting Options: Bitbucket is a cloud-based service, hosted and managed by Atlassian, whereas Gitea is a self-hosted solution that can be deployed on-premises or on a cloud server of your choice. This enables users to have more control over their repository's data and customize the environment according to their specific needs.
Community Support: Gitea, being an open-source platform, benefits from a large and active community of developers who contribute to its continuous improvement. Bitbucket, on the other hand, offers support services and resources directly from Atlassian, ensuring reliable support and assistance for its users.
User Interface and Customization: Bitbucket provides a sleek and intuitive user interface, making it easy for users to navigate and utilize its features. Gitea, being open-source, offers a highly customizable interface that can be tailored to suit individual preferences and requirements. This flexibility allows users to adapt the platform's appearance and functionality to meet their specific needs.
Integration Capabilities: Bitbucket seamlessly integrates with other Atlassian tools, such as Jira and Trello, providing a comprehensive solution for project management and collaboration. Gitea, on the other hand, offers a wide range of integrations with various third-party tools and services, allowing users to build a customized development workflow with their preferred tools.
Scalability and Performance: Bitbucket has the advantage of being backed by Atlassian's infrastructure, providing robust scalability and high-performance capabilities. Gitea, being self-hosted, can be optimized to meet specific performance requirements and can scale according to the hardware and resources allocated to it.
Pricing Model: Bitbucket offers a freemium pricing model, with free plans for small teams and paid plans with additional features and increased user limits. Gitea, being open-source, is completely free to use, with no limitations on the number of users or repositories. This cost-effectiveness makes Gitea a popular choice for organizations with tight budgets or large development teams.
In summary, Bitbucket is a cloud-based version control system with seamless integration with other Atlassian tools, while Gitea is a self-hosted, highly customizable platform with strong community support and a free pricing model. The choice between the two depends on factors such as hosting preferences, customization needs, integration requirements, and budget considerations.
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.
Out of most of the VCS solutions out there, we found Gitlab was the most feature complete with a free community edition. Their DevSecops offering is also a very robust solution. Gitlab CI/CD was quite easy to setup and the direct integration with your VCS + CI/CD is also a bonus. Out of the box integration with major cloud providers, alerting through instant messages etc. are all extremely convenient. We push our CI/CD updates to MS Teams.
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 Gitea
- Self-hosted23
- Lightweight16
- Free15
- Simple12
- Easy Setup9
- Multiple code maintainers9
- Pull requests and code reviews6
- Import existing git repositories5
- Squash and Merge is supported5
- Written in Go5
- Nice gui4
- Run in Raspberry Pi3
- Community-fork of Gogs2
- LDAP Support2
- Richable Packages1
- Gitea Actions(Github compatible)1
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 Gitea
- Community-fork of Gogs3
- Easy Windows authentication is not supported0
Sign up to add or upvote consMake informed product decisions
What is Bitbucket?
What is Gitea?
Need advice about which tool to choose?Ask the StackShare community!
What companies use Gitea?
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+34