GitHub vs Hystrix: What are the differences?
What is GitHub? Powerful collaboration, review, and code management for open source and private development projects. 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.
What is Hystrix? Latency and fault tolerance library. Hystrix is a latency and fault tolerance library designed to isolate points of access to remote systems, services and 3rd party libraries, stop cascading failure and enable resilience in complex distributed systems where failure is inevitable.
GitHub and Hystrix are primarily classified as "Code Collaboration & Version Control" and "Fault Tolerance" tools respectively.
Some of the features offered by GitHub are:
- Command Instructions
- Source Browser
- Git Powered Wikis
On the other hand, Hystrix provides the following key features:
- Latency and Fault Tolerance
- Realtime Operations
Hystrix is an open source tool with 17.7K GitHub stars and 3.63K GitHub forks. Here's a link to Hystrix's open source repository on GitHub.
According to the StackShare community, GitHub has a broader approval, being mentioned in 4714 company stacks & 6100 developers stacks; compared to Hystrix, which is listed in 12 company stacks and 8 developer stacks.
Whenever Qualys scan finds out software vulnerability, say for example Java SDK or any software version that has a potential vulnerability, we search the web to find out the solution and usually install a later version or patch downloading from the web. The problem is, as we are downloading it from web and there are a number of servers where we patch and as an ultimate outcome different people downloads different version and so forth. So I want to create a repository for such binaries so that we use the same patch for all servers.
When I was thinking about the repo, obviously first thought came as GitHub.. But then I realized, it is for code version control and collaboration, not for the packaged software. The other option I am thinking is JFrog Artifactory which stores the binaries and the package software.
What is your recommendation?
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, 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.
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 can’t 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 doesn’t let us chose it for our projects.
Sign up to add or upvote prosMake informed product decisions
Sign up to add or upvote consMake informed product decisions
What is GitHub?
What is Hystrix?
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