Need advice about which tool to choose?Ask the StackShare community!
GitHub vs Gitea: What are the differences?
Introduction: GitHub and Gitea are both web-based hosting services for version control using Git. While they have similar functionalities, there are key differences between the two platforms that set them apart from each other.
User Interface and User Experience: GitHub provides a more polished and user-friendly interface compared to Gitea. It offers a visually pleasing and intuitive design, making it easier for users to navigate and understand its features. On the other hand, Gitea has a simpler and more minimalist interface, which may appeal to users who prefer a more streamlined experience.
Hosting Options: GitHub is a cloud-based service, meaning that it hosts repositories on its servers, which allows for easy collaboration and access from anywhere with an internet connection. Gitea, on the other hand, can be self-hosted, allowing organizations to have more control over their repositories and data.
Community and Integrations: GitHub has a larger and more vibrant community compared to Gitea, making it a hub for open-source collaboration. It offers a wide range of integrations with popular development tools and services, such as CI/CD pipelines and project management tools. While Gitea also has a community and integrations, they may not be as extensive or well-established as those on GitHub.
Scalability and Performance: GitHub is designed to handle a massive amount of traffic and repositories, making it suitable for large-scale projects and organizations. It has robust infrastructure and resources to ensure high availability and performance. Gitea, being a self-hosted solution, may not have the same level of scalability and performance as GitHub, as it depends on the hardware and resources allocated to it by the organization hosting it.
Pricing: GitHub offers different pricing plans, including a free tier for public repositories and paid plans for private repositories. It also offers additional features and support depending on the plan. Gitea, being an open-source project, is free to use and has no associated costs. However, organizations opting for a self-hosted solution need to consider the costs of hardware, maintenance, and support.
Customization and Flexibility: Gitea offers more customization options compared to GitHub. With Gitea, organizations can tailor the platform to their specific requirements and preferences. It allows for the installation of plugins and extensions, enabling users to extend its functionality. GitHub, while it provides some customization options, may have limitations due to its cloud-based nature and standard configuration.
In summary, GitHub offers a more user-friendly interface, extensive community and integrations, scalability, pricing options, and customization options. Gitea, on the other hand, provides self-hosting capabilities, simplicity, and flexibility for organizations that prefer more control over their repositories and infrastructure.
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.
Both of us are far more familiar with GitHub than Gitlab, and so for our first big project together decided to go with what we know here instead of figuring out something new (there are so many new things we need to figure out, might as well reduce the number of optionally new things, lol). We aren't currently taking advantage of GitHub Actions or very many other built-in features (besides Dependabot) but luckily it integrates very well with the other services we're using.
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?
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?
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, Itโs possible to switch commits order, remove a commit, squash two or more commits, or edit, for instance.
Itโs particularly useful to run it before opening a pull request. It allows developers to โclean upโ 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.
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!
At DeployPlace we use self-hosted GitLab, we have chosen GitLab as most of us are familiar with it. We are happy with all features GitLab provides, I canโt imagine our life without integrated GitLab CI. Another important feature for us is integrated code review tool, we use it every day, we use merge requests, code reviews, branching. To be honest, most of us have GitHub accounts as well, we like to contribute in open source, and we want to be a part of the tech community, but lack of solutions from GitHub in the area of CI doesnโt let us chose it for our projects.
Pros of Gitea
- Self-hosted24
- Lightweight16
- Free15
- Simple12
- Easy Setup9
- Multiple code maintainers9
- Pull requests and code reviews6
- Squash and Merge is supported5
- Written in Go5
- Import existing git repositories5
- Nice gui4
- Run in Raspberry Pi3
- Community-fork of Gogs2
- LDAP Support2
- ๐ฃ โช๐ขโช๐โช๐ขโช๐ฃ1
- Gitea Actions(Github compatible)1
- โโ๐ฃ โช๐ขโช๐โช๐ขโช๐ฃ โโโโโ1
- Richable Packages1
- ๐ฃ โช๐ขโช๐โช๐ขโช๐ฃ1
- โ๐ฃ โช๐ขโช๐โช๐ขโช๐ฃ โโโโ1
- ๐ฃ โช๐ขโช๐โช๐ขโช๐ฃ0
Pros of GitHub
- Open source friendly1.8K
- Easy source control1.5K
- Nice UI1.3K
- Great for team collaboration1.1K
- Easy setup867
- Issue tracker504
- Great community487
- Remote team collaboration483
- Great way to share449
- Pull request and features planning442
- Just works147
- Integrated in many tools132
- Free Public Repos122
- Github Gists116
- Github pages113
- Easy to find repos83
- Open source62
- Easy to find projects60
- It's free60
- Network effect56
- Extensive API49
- Organizations43
- Branching42
- Developer Profiles34
- Git Powered Wikis32
- Great for collaboration30
- It's fun24
- Clean interface and good integrations23
- Community SDK involvement22
- Learn from others source code20
- Because: Git16
- It integrates directly with Azure14
- Standard in Open Source collab10
- Newsfeed10
- Fast8
- Beautiful user experience8
- It integrates directly with Hipchat8
- Easy to discover new code libraries7
- Smooth integration6
- Integrations6
- Graphs6
- Nice API6
- It's awesome6
- Cloud SCM6
- Quick Onboarding5
- Remarkable uptime5
- CI Integration5
- Reliable5
- Hands down best online Git service available5
- Version Control4
- Unlimited Public Repos at no cost4
- Simple but powerful4
- Loved by developers4
- Free HTML hosting4
- Uses GIT4
- Security options4
- Easy to use and collaborate with others4
- Easy deployment via SSH3
- Ci3
- IAM3
- Nice to use3
- Easy and efficient maintainance of the projects2
- Beautiful2
- Self Hosted2
- Issues tracker2
- Easy source control and everything is backed up2
- Never dethroned2
- All in one development service2
- Good tools support2
- Free HTML hostings2
- IAM integration2
- Very Easy to Use2
- Easy to use2
- Leads the copycats2
- Free private repos2
- Profound1
- Dasf1
Sign up to add or upvote prosMake informed product decisions
Cons of Gitea
- Community-fork of Gogs3
- Easy Windows authentication is not supported0
Cons of GitHub
- Owned by micrcosoft55
- Expensive for lone developers that want private repos38
- Relatively slow product/feature release cadence15
- API scoping could be better10
- Only 3 collaborators for private repos9
- Limited featureset for issue management4
- Does not have a graph for showing history like git lens3
- GitHub Packages does not support SNAPSHOT versions2
- No multilingual interface1
- Takes a long time to commit1
- Expensive1