Need advice about which tool to choose?Ask the StackShare community!

AWS CodeCommit

329
825
+ 1
193
GitLab

61.9K
53.1K
+ 1
2.5K
Add tool

AWS CodeCommit vs GitLab: What are the differences?

When it comes to version control systems, AWS CodeCommit and GitLab are two popular options that developers can choose from. While both provide similar functionality, there are some key differences between the two platforms. In this document, we will explore and compare the main differences between AWS CodeCommit and GitLab.

  1. Hosting Infrastructure: AWS CodeCommit is a fully managed service provided by Amazon Web Services. It is hosted on the AWS cloud infrastructure, ensuring a reliable and scalable version control system. On the other hand, GitLab can be hosted on-premises or in the cloud, giving users the flexibility to choose their preferred hosting environment.

  2. Integration with Other AWS Services: One significant advantage of AWS CodeCommit is its seamless integration with other AWS services. Developers can easily integrate their repositories with services like AWS CodePipeline and AWS CodeBuild for streamlined continuous integration and deployment workflows. GitLab, on the other hand, has a rich set of integrations but does not offer the same level of native integration with AWS services.

  3. Pricing Model: The pricing model is another area where AWS CodeCommit and GitLab differ. AWS CodeCommit is a pay-as-you-go service, meaning users are charged based on the amount of data stored in repositories and the data transfer in and out of the service. GitLab, on the other hand, offers different pricing tiers, including a free tier for small teams, and higher tiers with additional features and support.

  4. Access Control and Security: Both AWS CodeCommit and GitLab offer robust access control mechanisms to ensure the security of repositories. AWS CodeCommit integrates with AWS Identity and Access Management (IAM), allowing developers to manage access at various levels, from repository to branch level. GitLab also provides fine-grained access control options, including user roles and permissions. However, since GitLab can be self-hosted, users have full control over the security measures and can configure them according to their specific requirements.

  5. Scalability and Performance: AWS CodeCommit leverages the scalability and high availability of the AWS cloud infrastructure, ensuring optimal performance for large-scale projects. GitLab, on the other hand, can also scale based on the hosting environment, but users need to ensure sufficient resources are allocated to handle increased demand.

  6. Community and Support: GitLab has a thriving open-source community and offers extensive documentation and support resources. Users can benefit from the knowledge and contributions of the community, ensuring a rich ecosystem. AWS CodeCommit, being an AWS service, offers support through AWS Support plans, but the community aspect is not as prevalent as in GitLab.

In summary, AWS CodeCommit provides a fully managed version control system with seamless integration with other AWS services, while GitLab offers the flexibility of self-hosting and a vibrant open-source community. The choice between the two depends on factors such as hosting preferences, integration requirements, pricing structure, and the level of community support desired.

Advice on AWS CodeCommit and GitLab

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.

  1. Is it a good idea to migrate from Bitbucket to AWS Codecommit?
  2. 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?
See more
Replies (1)
Sinisha Mihajlovski
Design Lead | Senior Software Developer · | 1 upvotes · 363.3K views
Recommends

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.

See more
Decisions about AWS CodeCommit and GitLab
Phillip Manwaring
Developer at Coach Align · | 17 upvotes · 391.5K views

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.

See more
Elmar Wouters
CEO, Managing Director at Wouters Media · | 7 upvotes · 560K views

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.

See more
Weverton Timoteo

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?

See more
Weverton Timoteo

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?

See more
Weverton Timoteo

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.

See more
Kamaleshwar BN
Senior Software Engineer at Pulley · | 8 upvotes · 705.8K views

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.

See more

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!

See more
Nazar Atamaniuk
Shared insights
on
DeployPlaceDeployPlaceGitHubGitHubGitLabGitLab

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.

See more
Manage your open source components, licenses, and vulnerabilities
Learn More
Pros of AWS CodeCommit
Pros of GitLab
  • 44
    Free private repos
  • 26
    IAM integration
  • 24
    Pay-As-You-Go Pricing
  • 20
    Amazon feels the most Secure
  • 19
    Repo data encrypted at rest
  • 11
    I can make repository by myself if I have AWS account
  • 11
    Faster deployments when using other AWS services
  • 8
    AWS CodePipeline integration
  • 6
    Codebuild integration
  • 6
    Does not support web hooks yet! :(
  • 4
    Cost Effective
  • 2
    No Git LFS! Dealbreaker for me
  • 2
    Elastic Beanstalk Integration
  • 2
    Integrated with AWS Ecosystem
  • 1
    Integration via SQS/SNS for events (replaces webhooks)
  • 1
    IAM
  • 1
    Issue tracker
  • 1
    Available in Ireland (Dublin) region
  • 1
    CodeDeploy Integration
  • 1
    CodeCommit Trigger for an AWS Lambda Function
  • 1
    Open source friendly
  • 1
    Only US Region
  • 0
    Ui
  • 508
    Self hosted
  • 431
    Free
  • 339
    Has community edition
  • 242
    Easy setup
  • 240
    Familiar interface
  • 137
    Includes many features, including ci
  • 113
    Nice UI
  • 84
    Good integration with gitlabci
  • 57
    Simple setup
  • 35
    Has an official mobile app
  • 34
    Free private repository
  • 31
    Continuous Integration
  • 23
    Open source, great ui (like github)
  • 18
    Slack Integration
  • 15
    Full CI flow
  • 11
    Free and unlimited private git repos
  • 10
    All in one (Git, CI, Agile..)
  • 10
    User, group, and project access management is simple
  • 8
    Intuitive UI
  • 8
    Built-in CI
  • 6
    Full DevOps suite with Git
  • 6
    Both public and private Repositories
  • 5
    Integrated Docker Registry
  • 5
    So easy to use
  • 5
    CI
  • 5
    Build/pipeline definition alongside code
  • 5
    It's powerful source code management tool
  • 4
    Dockerized
  • 4
    It's fully integrated
  • 4
    On-premises
  • 4
    Security and Stable
  • 4
    Unlimited free repos & collaborators
  • 4
    Not Microsoft Owned
  • 4
    Excellent
  • 4
    Issue system
  • 4
    Mattermost Chat client
  • 3
    Great for team collaboration
  • 3
    Free private repos
  • 3
    Because is the best remote host for git repositories
  • 3
    Built-in Docker Registry
  • 3
    Opensource
  • 3
    Low maintenance cost due omnibus-deployment
  • 3
    I like the its runners and executors feature
  • 2
    Beautiful
  • 2
    Groups of groups
  • 2
    Multilingual interface
  • 2
    Powerful software planning and maintaining tools
  • 2
    Review Apps feature
  • 2
    Kubernetes integration with GitLab CI
  • 2
    One-click install through DigitalOcean
  • 2
    Powerful Continuous Integration System
  • 2
    It includes everything I need, all packaged with docker
  • 2
    The dashboard with deployed environments
  • 2
    HipChat intergration
  • 2
    Many private repo
  • 2
    Kubernetes Integration
  • 2
    Published IP list for whitelisting (gl-infra#434)
  • 2
    Wounderful
  • 2
    Native CI
  • 1
    Supports Radius/Ldap & Browser Code Edits

Sign up to add or upvote prosMake informed product decisions

Cons of AWS CodeCommit
Cons of GitLab
  • 12
    UI sucks
  • 4
    SLOW
  • 3
    No Issue Tracker
  • 2
    Bad diffing/no blame
  • 2
    NO LFS support
  • 2
    No fork
  • 2
    No webhooks
  • 1
    Can't download file from UI
  • 1
    Only time based triggers
  • 0
    Accident-prone UI
  • 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

Sign up to add or upvote consMake informed product decisions

What is 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.

What is 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.

Need advice about which tool to choose?Ask the StackShare community!

What companies use AWS CodeCommit?
What companies use GitLab?
Manage your open source components, licenses, and vulnerabilities
Learn More

Sign up to get full access to all the companiesMake informed product decisions

What tools integrate with AWS CodeCommit?
What tools integrate with GitLab?

Sign up to get full access to all the tool integrationsMake informed product decisions

Blog Posts

What are some alternatives to AWS CodeCommit and GitLab?
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.
GitHub Enterprise
GitHub Enterprise lets developers use the tools they love across the development process with support for popular IDEs, continuous integration tools, and hundreds of third party apps and services.
SVN (Subversion)
Subversion exists to be universally recognized and adopted as an open-source, centralized version control system characterized by its reliability as a safe haven for valuable data; the simplicity of its model and usage; and its ability to support the needs of a wide variety of users and projects, from individuals to large-scale enterprise operations.
Azure DevOps
Azure DevOps provides unlimited private Git hosting, cloud build for continuous integration, agile planning, and release management for continuous delivery to the cloud and on-premises. Includes broad IDE support.
See all alternatives