Buddy vs GitLab

Overview

GitLab

Stacks63.4K

Followers54.5K

Votes2.5K

GitHub Stars0

Forks0

Buddy

Stacks293

Followers348

Votes606

Buddy vs GitLab: What are the differences?

Introduction

In this article, we will compare and highlight the key differences between Buddy and GitLab.

Integration Capabilities: Buddy offers seamless integration with a wide array of tools and services, such as AWS, Google Cloud Platform, Azure, Docker, Kubernetes, and more. On the other hand, GitLab also supports integrations with various tools and services like Slack, Jira, Jenkins, and Kubernetes, but its integration capability is slightly more limited compared to Buddy.
Simple User Interface: Buddy has an intuitive and user-friendly interface that makes it easy for users to navigate and perform tasks. It provides a visually appealing dashboard where users can manage their projects efficiently. GitLab, on the other hand, has a more complex interface with a steep learning curve, especially for new users. It offers a comprehensive set of features, but the user interface can be overwhelming for some.
Continuous Integration/Continuous Deployment (CI/CD) Pipelines: Buddy offers a highly flexible and customizable CI/CD pipeline configuration, allowing users to automate their software development workflows effectively. It provides a visual editor for creating pipelines and an extensive library of actions for code testing, building, and deployment. GitLab also offers CI/CD pipelines, but the configuration and customization options are not as robust as Buddy's. It may require more manual configuration and scripting to achieve complex workflows.
Pricing Model: Buddy follows a subscription-based pricing model, offering different plans based on the number of users and projects. It provides a 14-day free trial and transparent pricing tiers for easy scalability. GitLab, on the other hand, offers both self-hosted and cloud-based options. The self-hosted version allows users to have complete control over infrastructure but requires additional setup and maintenance. The cloud-based version has various pricing tiers based on the number of users and additional features.
Built-in Code Review: Buddy provides a built-in code review feature that allows for collaborative code review directly within the platform. It facilitates efficient teamwork and improves the overall code quality. GitLab also offers code review capabilities, but it may require additional setup and integration with external tools like GitLab Merge Requests for a seamless code review process.
Deployment to Multiple Environments: Buddy allows users to deploy their applications to multiple environments, such as staging, production, or development, easily. Users can define custom deployment actions for different environments and automate the deployment process with just a few clicks. GitLab also supports multi-environment deployments, but the configuration and setup may require more manual intervention compared to Buddy's user-friendly approach.

In summary, Buddy stands out with its extensive integration capabilities, user-friendly interface, flexible CI/CD pipelines, subscription-based pricing, built-in code review, and easy deployment to multiple environments. GitLab, on the other hand, offers some integration options, a comprehensive feature set, both self-hosted and cloud-based options, code review capabilities, and multi-environment deployment, but with some limitations compared to Buddy.

Share your Stack

Help developers discover the tools you use. Get visibility for your team's tech choices and contribute to the community's knowledge.

View Docs

CLI (Node.js)

Manual

Advice on GitLab, Buddy

Anonymous

May 25, 2020

Decided

Gitlab as A LOT of features that GitHub and Azure DevOps are missing. Even if both GH and Azure are backed by Microsoft, GitLab being open source has a faster upgrade rate and the hosted by gitlab.com solution seems more appealing than anything else! Quick win: the UI is way better and the Pipeline is way easier to setup on GitLab!

624k views624k

Comments

Weverton

CTO at SourceLevel

Jul 28, 2020

Review

Using an inclusive language is crucial for fostering a diverse culture. Git has changed the naming conventions to be more language-inclusive, and so you should change. Our development tools, like GitHub and GitLab, already supports the change.

SourceLevel deals very nicely with repositories that changed the master branch to a more appropriate word. Besides, you can use the grep linter the look for exclusive terms contained in the source code.

As the inclusive language gap may happen in other aspects of our lives, have you already thought about them?

944k views944k

Comments

Weverton

CTO at SourceLevel

Aug 3, 2020

Review

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?

1.19M views1.19M

Comments

Detailed Comparison

GitLab	Buddy
GitLab offers git repository management, code reviews, issue tracking, activity feeds and wikis. Enterprises install GitLab on-premise and connect it with LDAP and Active Directory servers for secure authentication and authorization. A single GitLab server can handle more than 25,000 users but it is also possible to create a high availability setup with multiple active servers.	Git platform for web and software developers with Docker-based tools for Continuous Integration and Deployment.
Manage git repositories with fine grained access controls that keep your code secure;Perform code reviews and enhance collaboration with merge requests;Each project can also have an issue tracker and a wiki;Used by more than 100,000 organizations, GitLab is the most popular solution to manage git repositories on-premises;Completely free and open source (MIT Expat license);Powered by Ruby on Rails	Automatic deployments on push to branch;Docker-based builds and tests;10-minute setup of complete environment;Integrates with GitHub, Bitbucket & GitLab;DevOps and website monitoring actions;Clear and telling UI/UX;Supports all popular languages and frameworks, including PHP/Laravel, Node.js, Rails, Python, Java, .NET Core, Elixir and Go
Statistics
GitHub Stars 0	GitHub Stars -
GitHub Forks 0	GitHub Forks -
Stacks 63.4K	Stacks 293
Followers 54.5K	Followers 348
Votes 2.5K	Votes 606
Pros & Cons
Pros 508 Self hosted 431 Free 339 Has community edition 242 Easy setup 240 Familiar interface Cons 28 Slow ui performance 9 Introduce breaking bugs every release 6 Insecure (no published IP list for whitelisting) 2 Built-in Docker Registry 1 Review Apps feature	Pros 56 Easy setup 53 Docker 50 Continuous Integration 49 Integrations 46 Beautiful dashboard Cons 1 Deleted account after 1 month of not pushing code
Integrations
No integrations available	Jekyll Grunt Microsoft Azure Kubernetes Hexo Amazon EC2 Meteor Slack .NET Ruby

What are some alternatives to GitLab, Buddy?

GitHub

GitHub is the best place to share code with friends, co-workers, classmates, and complete strangers. Over three million people use GitHub to build amazing things together.

Bitbucket

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.

RhodeCode

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

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.

Gogs

The goal of this project is to make the easiest, fastest and most painless way to set up a self-hosted Git service. With Go, this can be done in independent binary distribution across ALL platforms that Go supports, including Linux, Mac OS X, and Windows.

Gitea

Git with a cup of tea! Painless self-hosted all-in-one software development service, including Git hosting, code review, team collaboration, package registry and CI/CD. It published under the MIT license.

Cloud 66

Cloud 66 gives you everything you need to build, deploy and maintain your applications on any cloud, without the headache of dealing with "server stuff". Frameworks: Ruby on Rails, Node.js, Jamstack, Laravel, GoLang, and more.

DeployBot

DeployBot makes it simple to deploy your work anywhere. You can compile or process your code in a Docker container on our infrastructure, and we'll copy it to your servers once everything has been successfully built.

Upsource

Upsource summarizes recent changes in your repository, showing commit messages, authors, quick diffs, links to detailed diff views and associated code reviews. A commit graph helps visualize the history of commits, branches and merges in your repository.

Beanstalk

A single process to commit code, review with the team, and deploy the final result to your customers.

Related Comparisons

Buddy vs GitLab: What are the differences?

Introduction

In this article, we will compare and highlight the key differences between Buddy and GitLab.

Integration Capabilities: Buddy offers seamless integration with a wide array of tools and services, such as AWS, Google Cloud Platform, Azure, Docker, Kubernetes, and more. On the other hand, GitLab also supports integrations with various tools and services like Slack, Jira, Jenkins, and Kubernetes, but its integration capability is slightly more limited compared to Buddy.
Simple User Interface: Buddy has an intuitive and user-friendly interface that makes it easy for users to navigate and perform tasks. It provides a visually appealing dashboard where users can manage their projects efficiently. GitLab, on the other hand, has a more complex interface with a steep learning curve, especially for new users. It offers a comprehensive set of features, but the user interface can be overwhelming for some.
Continuous Integration/Continuous Deployment (CI/CD) Pipelines: Buddy offers a highly flexible and customizable CI/CD pipeline configuration, allowing users to automate their software development workflows effectively. It provides a visual editor for creating pipelines and an extensive library of actions for code testing, building, and deployment. GitLab also offers CI/CD pipelines, but the configuration and customization options are not as robust as Buddy's. It may require more manual configuration and scripting to achieve complex workflows.
Pricing Model: Buddy follows a subscription-based pricing model, offering different plans based on the number of users and projects. It provides a 14-day free trial and transparent pricing tiers for easy scalability. GitLab, on the other hand, offers both self-hosted and cloud-based options. The self-hosted version allows users to have complete control over infrastructure but requires additional setup and maintenance. The cloud-based version has various pricing tiers based on the number of users and additional features.
Built-in Code Review: Buddy provides a built-in code review feature that allows for collaborative code review directly within the platform. It facilitates efficient teamwork and improves the overall code quality. GitLab also offers code review capabilities, but it may require additional setup and integration with external tools like GitLab Merge Requests for a seamless code review process.
Deployment to Multiple Environments: Buddy allows users to deploy their applications to multiple environments, such as staging, production, or development, easily. Users can define custom deployment actions for different environments and automate the deployment process with just a few clicks. GitLab also supports multi-environment deployments, but the configuration and setup may require more manual intervention compared to Buddy's user-friendly approach.

Buddy vs GitLab

Overview