Bitbucket vs Plastic SCM: What are the differences?
Bitbucket: One place to plan projects, collaborate on code, test and deploy, all with free private repositories. 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; Plastic SCM: A distributed version control with strong merging, great GUIs and support for huge files. Plastic SCM is a distributed version control designed for big projects It excels on branching and merging, graphical user interfaces, and can also deal with large files and even file-locking (great for game devs).
It includes "semantic" features like refactor detection to ease diffing complex refactors..
Bitbucket and Plastic SCM are primarily classified as "Code Collaboration & Version Control" and "Version Control System" tools respectively.
Some of the features offered by Bitbucket are:
- Unlimited private repositories, charged per user
- Best-in-class Jira integration
- Built-in CI/CD
On the other hand, Plastic SCM provides the following key features:
- Distributed version control system
- Branch Explorer
- Semantic Version Control
"Free private repos" is the primary reason why developers consider Bitbucket over the competitors, whereas "Wanna do Branch per Task Dev? Plastic rocks it" was stated as the key factor in picking Plastic SCM.
What is Bitbucket?
What is Plastic SCM?
Need advice about which tool to choose?Ask the StackShare community!
Sign up to add, upvote and see more prosMake informed product decisions
What are the cons of using Plastic SCM?
Sign up to add, upvote and see more consMake informed product decisions
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
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.
Bitbucket provides 5 private repositories for free that is I believe the best feature. GitLab seems very simmilar to GitHub. The only reason I've choosen GitHub is its popularity. It seems faster than GitLab, uglier than Bitbucket and featured as others. The best open source projects are hosted on GitHub. Many applications are integrated with GitHub like my favourite #GitKraken.
An easy one this time - source control. Well, should we even think about anything else but Git these days? :) As for the repository, we use Bitbucket for only historical reasons. We used it since the time when the pricing model was more convenient than GitHub. And Bitbucket does the work for us perfectly, so no real reason to switch.
How we ended up choosing Confluence as our internal web / wiki / documentation platform at Katana.
It happened because we chose Bitbucket over GitHub . We had Katana's first hackaton to assemble and test product engineering platform. It turned out that at that time you could have Bitbucket's private repositories and a team of five people for free - Done!
This decision led us to using Bitbucket pipelines for CI, Jira for Kanban, and finally, Confluence. We also use Microsoft Office 365 and started with using OneNote, but SharePoint is still a nightmare product to use to collaborate, so OneNote had to go.
Now, when thinking of the key value of Confluence to Katana then it is Product Requirements Management. We use Page Properties macros, integrations (with Slack , InVision, Sketch etc.) to manage Product Roadmap, flash out Epic and User Stories.
We ended up with using Confluence because it is the best fit for our current engineering ecosystem.
I use GitHub because it's the coolest kid on the block for open source. Searching for repos you need/want is easy.
Especially with the apache foundation moving their workloads to them, unlimited private repos, and a package registry on the way, they are becoming the one stop shop for open source needs.
I'm curious to see how the GitHub Sponsors(patreon for developers) plays out, and what it'll do for open source. Hopefully, they design it in a way where it's not abused by big tech to "plant" developers that look like they're building open source when they're actually building proprietary tools.
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.
When you interact with CircleCI's web application, all of your requests are hitting the #API hosts. We handle the majority of our authentication via #OAuth from GitHub or Bitbucket. We provide programmatic access to everything exposed in the UI through an API token that you can generate once you have authenticated.
Version control is complex so having a) responsive support line both fast in response and comprehensive in their support, is great; but also b) easy to use GUIs reduce complexity: a nifty branch explorer helps you navigate the most convoluted of architectures.
Plastic SCM is a solid, reliable piece of software that will help you with get things done.
I was looking for an alternative to GitHub, where I could store my own private repositories. BitBucket filled that need and has performed extremely well.
I use Bitbucket's git repositories as a low cost config sync between servers.
We use Bitbucket and Bitbucket Pipelines because of its tight integration with JIRA and code authorization features.
The primary drawback is that its extension ecosystem (e.g., PR review tools) is miles behind Github
Best GIT repository management software that allows free closed-source projects. Also works seamlessly with other Atlassian products.
Great private repository capabilities that can be used for continuous integration in conjunction with Jira and Bamboo.