StackShareStackShare
Follow on
StackShare

Discover and share technology stacks from companies around the world.

Follow on

© 2025 StackShare. All rights reserved.

Product

  • Stacks
  • Tools
  • Feed

Company

  • About
  • Contact

Legal

  • Privacy Policy
  • Terms of Service
  1. Stackups
  2. DevOps
  3. Code Collaboration
  4. Code Collaboration Version Control
  5. GitBucket vs OneDev

GitBucket vs OneDev

OverviewComparisonAlternatives

Overview

GitBucket
GitBucket
Stacks79
Followers177
Votes36
OneDev
OneDev
Stacks8
Followers30
Votes3
GitHub Stars14.4K
Forks920

GitBucket vs OneDev: What are the differences?

Introduction

GitBucket and OneDev are both web-based platforms that provide version control and collaboration features for software development projects. However, there are several key differences between these two platforms.

  1. User Interface: GitBucket has a simpler and more minimalistic user interface, making it easier for new users to navigate and get started. On the other hand, OneDev offers a more feature-rich and customizable user interface, allowing users to tailor the platform to their specific needs.

  2. Integration with other tools: OneDev has better integration capabilities with other tools commonly used in software development projects, such as JIRA, Jenkins, and Slack. This allows for better collaboration and seamless workflow between different tools. GitBucket, on the other hand, has limited integration options and may require additional configuration to work with other tools.

  3. Access Control: OneDev provides more granular and flexible access control options, allowing users to set up fine-grained permissions for individual repositories, branches, and even specific files or folders. GitBucket, on the other hand, offers a simpler access control model with fewer options for customization.

  4. Code Review Process: OneDev has a built-in code review workflow that allows for easy collaboration and feedback on code changes, making it suitable for teams that value code quality and collaboration. GitBucket, on the other hand, lacks a dedicated code review process and requires users to follow external workflows or use third-party tools for code review.

  5. Deployment and Continuous Integration: OneDev offers built-in support for continuous integration and deployment, allowing users to automatically build, test, and deploy their applications using integrated pipelines. GitBucket, on the other hand, does not have native support for these features and requires users to set up and configure external tools for continuous integration and deployment.

  6. Extensibility: GitBucket has a more active and vibrant plugin development community, with a wide range of plugins available for extending the functionality of the platform. OneDev, on the other hand, has fewer plugins available and may require custom development for specific integration or extension needs.

In summary, OneDev offers a more feature-rich and customizable user interface, better integration with other tools, more granular access control, built-in code review processes, support for deployment and continuous integration, while GitBucket provides a simpler user interface, limited integration options, simpler access control, lacks a dedicated code review process, requires external tools for deployment and continuous integration, and has a more active plugin development community.

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)
or
Manual

Detailed Comparison

GitBucket
GitBucket
OneDev
OneDev

GitBucket provides a Github-like UI and features such as Git repository hosting via HTTP and SSH, repository viewer, issues, wiki and pull request.

It is a super easy all-in-one DevOps platform. With Issue Tracking, Git Management, Pull Request, and Build Farm. Simple yet Powerful.

Public / Private Git repository (http and ssh access);Repository viewer and online file editing;Repository search (Code and Issues);Wiki;Issues;Fork / Pull request;Mail notification;Activity timeline;User management (for Administrators);Group (like Organization in Github);LDAP integration;Gravatar support
Docker First Kubernetes Native Build Farm; Create Build Spec in a Breeze; Flexible Build Workflow and Pipeline; Custom Issue States and Fields; Auto-Refreshing Issue Boards; Symbol Search and Navigation
Statistics
GitHub Stars
-
GitHub Stars
14.4K
GitHub Forks
-
GitHub Forks
920
Stacks
79
Stacks
8
Followers
177
Followers
30
Votes
36
Votes
3
Pros & Cons
Pros
  • 8
    Self hosted
  • 7
    Open source
  • 6
    Familiar interface
  • 5
    Simple setup
  • 5
    Scala
Pros
  • 1
    Free
  • 1
    Self-hosted
  • 1
    Integrated CI/CD
Integrations
No integrations available
C++
C++
Java
Java
Less
Less
JavaScript
JavaScript
Golang
Golang
PHP
PHP
Kubernetes
Kubernetes
C#
C#
Microsoft Edge
Microsoft Edge

What are some alternatives to GitBucket, OneDev?

GitHub

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

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.

GitLab

GitLab

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.

RhodeCode

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

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

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

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.

Upsource

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

Beanstalk

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

BinTray

BinTray

Bintray offers developers the fastest way to publish and consume OSS software releases. With Bintray's full self-service platform developers have full control over their published software and how it is distributed to the world.

Related Comparisons

GitHub
Bitbucket

Bitbucket vs GitHub vs GitLab

GitHub
Bitbucket

AWS CodeCommit vs Bitbucket vs GitHub

Kubernetes
Rancher

Docker Swarm vs Kubernetes vs Rancher

gulp
Grunt

Grunt vs Webpack vs gulp

Graphite
Kibana

Grafana vs Graphite vs Kibana