Need advice about which tool to choose?Ask the StackShare community!
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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, 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.
Pros of AWS CodeCommit
- Free private repos44
- IAM integration26
- Pay-As-You-Go Pricing24
- Amazon feels the most Secure20
- Repo data encrypted at rest19
- I can make repository by myself if I have AWS account11
- Faster deployments when using other AWS services11
- AWS CodePipeline integration8
- Codebuild integration6
- Does not support web hooks yet! :(6
- Cost Effective4
- No Git LFS! Dealbreaker for me2
- Elastic Beanstalk Integration2
- Integrated with AWS Ecosystem2
- Integration via SQS/SNS for events (replaces webhooks)1
- IAM1
- Issue tracker1
- Available in Ireland (Dublin) region1
- CodeDeploy Integration1
- CodeCommit Trigger for an AWS Lambda Function1
- Open source friendly1
- Only US Region1
- Ui0
Pros of GitLab
- Self hosted508
- Free431
- Has community edition339
- Easy setup242
- Familiar interface240
- Includes many features, including ci137
- Nice UI113
- Good integration with gitlabci84
- Simple setup57
- Has an official mobile app35
- Free private repository34
- Continuous Integration31
- Open source, great ui (like github)23
- Slack Integration18
- Full CI flow15
- Free and unlimited private git repos11
- All in one (Git, CI, Agile..)10
- User, group, and project access management is simple10
- Intuitive UI8
- Built-in CI8
- Full DevOps suite with Git6
- Both public and private Repositories6
- Integrated Docker Registry5
- So easy to use5
- CI5
- Build/pipeline definition alongside code5
- It's powerful source code management tool5
- Dockerized4
- It's fully integrated4
- On-premises4
- Security and Stable4
- Unlimited free repos & collaborators4
- Not Microsoft Owned4
- Excellent4
- Issue system4
- Mattermost Chat client4
- Great for team collaboration3
- Free private repos3
- Because is the best remote host for git repositories3
- Built-in Docker Registry3
- Opensource3
- Low maintenance cost due omnibus-deployment3
- I like the its runners and executors feature3
- Beautiful2
- Groups of groups2
- Multilingual interface2
- Powerful software planning and maintaining tools2
- Review Apps feature2
- Kubernetes integration with GitLab CI2
- One-click install through DigitalOcean2
- Powerful Continuous Integration System2
- It includes everything I need, all packaged with docker2
- The dashboard with deployed environments2
- HipChat intergration2
- Many private repo2
- Kubernetes Integration2
- Published IP list for whitelisting (gl-infra#434)2
- Wounderful2
- Native CI2
- Supports Radius/Ldap & Browser Code Edits1
Sign up to add or upvote prosMake informed product decisions
Cons of AWS CodeCommit
- UI sucks12
- SLOW4
- No Issue Tracker3
- Bad diffing/no blame2
- NO LFS support2
- No fork2
- No webhooks2
- Can't download file from UI1
- Only time based triggers1
- Accident-prone UI0
Cons of GitLab
- Slow ui performance28
- Introduce breaking bugs every release9
- Insecure (no published IP list for whitelisting)6
- Built-in Docker Registry2
- Review Apps feature1